I currently have a canonical tag pointing to a different url for single page categories on eCommerce site. Is this wrong ?
-
Hi Mozzers,
I have a query regarding canonical tags on my eCommerce site..
Basically on my category pages whereby I have more than 1 page, I currently use next/prev rel and also have a canonical tag pointing to the View all version of that page. This is believe is correct.(see example - http://goo.gl/2gz6LV
However, from looking at the view source on my other pages, I have noticed I have canonical tags on all my category pages which are only a single page and these canonicaltag are pointing to a different url.
I enclose an example . Please advise
Category page - http://goo.gl/Pk4zYl
This is where the canonical tag points to - http://goo.gl/EwKv26
Another example
Category Page - http://goo.gl/4gWTdD
This is where the canonical tag for that page points to http://goo.gl/qm4HV7
Should I either make sure that categories that are only 1 page , don't have a canonical tag at all ? or do I have a canonical tag on say every page on my website for safety pointing to the main url for that page. The later, I imagine would be a belt and braces approach but I don't want to screw up anything if it's not advised?
Please help/
Kind regards
Pete
-
Hello Paul ,
Many thanks for your assistance and comprehensive answer to solve this.
You raise some very valid points and something I hadn't picked up on - the fact that currently my internal structure is referencing urls which are not the same as what the canonical tag is set for. Asyou say, this is not a good thing..
Once again, thanks for your help to solve this. My developer is on the case now.
thanks
Pete
-
Just to clarify what is happening here, I looked at your examples links and here is what I see.
Your website has a home page (e.g. homepage.com) and site wide links in navigation etc to various categories such as
http://www.website.com/category-keyword1/
http://www.website.com/category-keyword2/
http://www.website.com/category-keyword3/
As I look at these what I will call "original" category pages, they have canonical links that link to the following pages (note I do not see this on any of your product pages or other pages on the site)
<link rel="canonical" href="http: website.com="" category-keyword2="" limit:9999"=""></link rel="canonical" href="http:>
<link rel="canonical" href="http: website.com="" category-keyword3="" limit:9999"=""></link rel="canonical" href="http:>
The URLs with the limit:9999 also show a 200 if you visit them, are a duplicate page and canonical to themselves.
This is not good. What you are telling Google is that for each of your "original" category pages that you link to extensively with your internal link structure, that the actual (aka canonical) page is the URL with the limit:9999.
I would say that you did not need the canonical to start with, but now that it is there, here is how you fix it.
-
on all the original category pages (i.e. http://www.website.com/category-keyword1/) you need to add a canonical to self. Just update the canonical tag and remove the "limit:9999" There is somewhere in your CMS that is doing this, you may need a dev to help. You have to absolutely do this.
-
on all the limit:9999 pages you have 4 possible options that you can do. I put these in order of preference with option a being your best approach, option b your second best, and so on. Therefore, if you cannot do option a, then try option b, and so on.
a) 301 redirect the limit:9999 pages to the original category pages
b) set the canonical on the limit:9999 pages to the original category pages
c) 404 the limit:9999 pages
d) block the limit:9999 pages in robots.txt, but be careful that you do not block the original pages. Search Console has a great robots.txt testing tool for figuring this out.
Good luck!
-
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
I have a metadata issue. My site crawl is coming back with missing descriptions, but all of the pages look like site tags (i.e. /blog/?_sft_tag=call-routing)
I have a metadata issue. My site crawl is coming back with missing descriptions, but all of the pages look like site tags (i.e. /blog/?_sft_tag=call-routing)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | amarieyoussef0 -
Duplicate page url crawl report
Details: Hello. Looking at the duplicate page url report that comes out of Moz, is the best tactic to a) use 301 redirects, and b) should the url that's flagged for duplicate page content be pointed to the referring url? Not sure where the 301 redirect should be applied... should this url, for example: <colgroup><col width="452"></colgroup>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | compassseo
| http://newgreenair.com/website/blog/ | which is listed in the first column of the Duplicate Page Content crawl, be pointed to referring url in the same spreadsheet? Or, what's the best way to apply the 301 redirect? thanks!0 -
Dealing with Canonical tag in volusion
Hi We have an ecommerce site where we have some returns/scratch /dented products identical to the original one. The onpage content of the damaged/original is pretty much identical with the damaged just having a describing the damage. I had wanted to make a canonical tag on the damaged product to the original so it would not be a problem of duplicate content but as it is a volusion site we dont have that option - it only canonicalizes back to itself! Any ideas what else I can do - cant really change the content much and I dont really want to deindex it so people find it? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | henya0 -
Is a 301 Redirect and a Canonical Tag on Uppercase to Lowercase Pages Correct?
We have a medium size site that lost more than 50% of its traffic in July 2013 just before the Panda rollout. After working with a SEO agency, we were advised to clean up various items, one of them being that the 10k+ urls were all mixed case (i.e. www.example.com/Blue-Widget). A 301 redirect was set up thereafter forcing all these urls to go to a lowercase version (i.e. www.example.com/blue-widget). In addition, there was a canonical tag placed on all of these pages in case any parameters or other characters were incorporated into a url. I thought this was a good set up, but when running a SEO audit through a third party tool, it shows me the massive amount of 301 redirects. And, now I wonder if there should only be a canonical without the redirect or if its okay to have tens of thousands 301 redirects on the site. We have not recovered yet from the traffic loss yet and we are wondering if its really more of a technical problem than a Google penalty. Guidance and advise from those experienced in the industry is appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ABK7170 -
If I own a .com url and also have the same url with .net, .info, .org, will I want to point them to the .com IP address?
I have a domain, for example, mydomain.com and I purchased mydomain.net, mydomain.info, and mydomain.org. Should I point the host @ to the IP where the .com is hosted in wpengine? I am not doing anything with the .org, .info, .net domains. I simply purchased them to prevent competitors from buying the domains.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | djlittman0 -
How would you handle 12,000 "tag" pages on Wordpress site?
We have a Wordpress site where /tag/ pages were not set to "noindex" and they are driving 25% of site's traffic (roughly 100,000 visits year to date). We can't simply "noindex" them all now, or we'll lose a massive amount of traffic. We can't possibly write unique descriptions for all of them. We can't just do nothing or a Panda update will come by and ding us for duplicate content one day (surprised it hasn't already). What would you do?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | M_D_Golden_Peak1 -
Rel=canonical tag on original page?
Afternoon All,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jellyfish-Agency
We are using Concrete5 as our CMS system, we are due to change but for the moment we have to play with what we have got. Part of the C5 system allows us to attribute our main page into other categories, via a page alaiser add-on. But what it also does is create several url paths and duplicate pages depending on how many times we take the original page and reference it in other categories. We have tried C5 canonical/SEO add-on's but they all seem to fall short. We have tried to address this issue in the most efficient way possible by using the rel=canonical tag. The only issue is the limitations of our cms system. We add the canonical tag to the original page header and this will automatically place this tag on all the duplicate pages and in turn fix the problem of duplicate content. The only problem is the canonical tag is on the original page as well, but it is referencing itself, effectively creating a tagging circle. Does anyone foresee a problem with the canonical tag being on the original page but in turn referencing itself? What we have done is try to simplify our duplicate content issues. We have over 2500 duplicate page issues because of this aliasing add-on and want to automate the canonical tag addition, rather than go to each individual page and manually add this tag, so the original reference page can remain the original. We have implemented this tag on one page at the moment with 9 duplicate pages/url's and are monitoring, but was curious if people had experienced this before or had any thoughts?0 -
Canonical URL Question
Hi Everyone I like to run this question by the community and get a second opinion on best practices for an issue that I ran into. I got two pages, Page A is the original page and Page B is the page with duplicate content. We already added** ="Page A**" />** to the duplicate content (Page B).** **Here is my question, since Page B is duplicate content and there is a link rel="canonical" added to it, would you put in the time to add meta tags and optimize the title of the page? Thanks in advance for all your help.**
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DRTBA0