Is there an advantage to using rel=canonical rather than noindex on pages on my mobile site (m.company.com)?
-
Is there an advantage to using link rel=alternate (as recommended by Google) rather than noindex on pages on my mobile site (m.company.com)?
The content on the mobile pages is very similar to the content on the desktop site. I see Google recommends canonical and alternate tags, but what are the benefits of using those rather than noindex?
-
If we can't change the tags before launch, but change them immediately after, how long does it take Google to recognize the change and adjust our ranking? Will we be digging ourselves out of a hole if we implement it the wrong way and fix it shortly after?
-
Hi Jennifer,
You should definitely index the mobile site. As long as you correctly implement the mobile switchboard tags (which are basically a mobile-specific version of the standard rel=canonical/rel=alternate approach) this will not lead to duplication but rather to the correct version of the page showing up for mobile searches.
There is some discussion around whether or not Google currently has a separate index for mobile search (in any case they are likely to in future if they don't currently) but they definitely have a separate mobile crawler, which spoofs an iPhone user-agent. If you noindex all the mobile pages and redirect mobile user-agents to mobile versions of your pages, what the mobile crawler will see is your whole site as noindexed.
-
Isn't a noindex page still crawlable though? We are not disallowing it in robots.txt - they just don't want both the mobile site and the desktop site showing up in the search index.
My developers are telling me that if the desktop site redirects a mobile user to the mobile site, it will get the mobile friendly tag. (It's a separate subsite, rather than dynamic serving on the same URL).
-
Google gives mobile friendly pages preference on mobile users SERPs. When they crawl your site they determine if a page is "mobile friendly" and they index it to serve.
Since the mobile-friendly update on April 21st of this year, Google will favor mobile friendly and responsive pages on mobile device SERPs.
Use this tool to verify that your pages are mobile friendly
If you no index your mobile pages, they will not be crawled and assessed as mobile friendly. Thereby negating the whole point of having a mobile version of your site. Stick to Rel=canonical to tell google which page is authentic/original. Add the rel="canonical" tag to point to the desktop and the rel="alternate" on the desktop site to point to the mobile site.
Check mobile configuration - go to option, Dynamic Serving
Use the bots name "Googlebot-Mobile" to differentiate which version of your site to serve. Serve up the mobile version when that bot name visits for a crawl. Check in the User-agent header.
Specifically referenced -
"Once Googlebot-Mobile crawls your URLs, we then check for whether the URL is viewable on a mobile device. Pages we determine aren't viewable on a mobile phone won't be included in our mobile site index (although they may be included in the regular web index)."
Also, check out the Webmasters Mobile Documentation.
Once Googlebot-Mobile crawls your URLs, we then check for whether the URL is viewable on a mobile device. Pages we determine aren't viewable on a mobile phone won't be included in our mobile site index (although they may be included in the regular web index).
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
-
Impact of Removing 60,000 Page from Sites
We currently have a database of content across about 100 sites. All of this content is exactly the same on all of them, and it is also found all over the internet in other places. So it's not unique at all and it brings in almost no organic traffic. I want to remove this bloat from our sites. Problem is that this database accounts for almost 60,000 pages on each site and it is all currently indexed. I'm a little bit worried that flat out dumping all of this data at once is going to cause Google to wonder what in the world we are doing and we are going to see some issues from it (at least in the short run). My thought now is to remove this content in stages so it doesn't all get dropped at once. But would deindexing all of this content first be better? That way Google would still be able to crawl it and understand that it is not relevant user content and therefore minimize impact when we do terminate it completely? Any other ideas for minimizing SEO issues?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MJTrevens1 -
How to optimize count of interlinking by increasing Interlinking count of chosen landing pages and decreasing for less important pages within the site?
We have taken out our interlinking counts (Only Internal Links and not Outbound Links) through Google WebMaster tool and discovered that the count of interlinking of our most significant pages are less as compared to of less significant pages. Our objective is to reverse the existing behavior by increasing Interlinking count of important pages and reduce the count for less important pages so that maximum link juice could be transferred to right pages thereby increasing SEO traffic.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vivekrathore0 -
Is Video Sharing sites is still useful for SERP ?
Well I am not talking about the audience views, i am asking whether it is good for submitting videos to multiple video sites for backlinks and any sharp movements for the keywords. I seen most of the sites are nofollow which is not useful but for the link diversification is that something good ?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | chandubaba0 -
Rel=Canonical - needed if part duplication?
Hi Im looking at a site with multiple products available in multiple languages. Some of the languages are not complete, so where the product description is not available in that language the new page, with its own url in the other languages may take the English version. However, this description is perhaps 200 words long only, and after the description are a host of other products displays within that category. So say for example we were selling glasses, there is a 200 word description about glasses (this is the part that is being copied across the languages) and then 10 products underneath that are translated. So the pages are somewhat different but this 200 word description is copied thru different versions of our site. Currently, the english version is not rel=canonical, would it be better to add the english version where we lack a description and do the canonical option or in fact better to leave it blank until we have a translated description? As its only part of the onpage wording, would this 200 word subsection cause us duplication issues?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | xoffie0 -
End of March we migrated our site over to HubSpot. We went from page 3 on Google to non existent. Still found on page 2 of Yahoo and Bing. Beyond frustrated...HELP PLEASE "www.vortexpartswashers.com"
End of March we migrated our site over to HubSpot. We went from page 3 on Google to non existent. Still found on page 2 of Yahoo and Bing under same keywords " parts washers" Beyond frustrated...HELP PLEASE "www.vortexpartswashers.com"
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mhart0 -
Linking Sister-Sites - Diapers.com Example
Many of the big guns like 1800 Flowers, Diapers.com and others all have their sister sites in tabs at the top. Example: http://www.diapers.com/ with their 3 other properties. Since all properties link to one another on every page, it's really a wash, right? No real gain as engines know they are connected and it's the same link multiple times. No real problem either as it's natural for the user experience to have reciprocal links here between the brands. Any additional thoughts here?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SEOPA0 -
Quickseoresults.com - Anyone used them?
Has anyone had any experience with or used quickseoresults.com? I'm just looking into them now. They seem to offer a 30 day free trial based on 'white hat' tactics that gives results. You can then pay to continue their services. They seem to base their services heavily around link building, so I'm dubious.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PeterAlexLeigh0 -
Link anchor text: only useful for pages linked to directly or distributed across site?
As a SEO I understand that link anchor text for the focus keyword on the page linked to is very important, but I have a question which I can not find the answer to in any books or blogs, namely: does inbound anchor text 'carry over' to other pages in your site, like linkjuice? For instance, if I have a homepage focusing on keyword X and a subpage (with internal links to it) focusing on keyword Y. Does is then help to link to the homepage with keyword Y anchor texts? Will this keyword thematically 'flow through' the internal link structure and help the subpage's ranking? In a broader sense: will a diverse link anchor text profile to your homepage help all other pages in your domain rank thematically? Or is link anchor text just useful for the direct page that is linked to? All views and experiences are welcome! Kind regards, Joost van Vught
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JoostvanVught0