If you use canonicals do the meta descriptions need to be different?
-
For example, we have 3 different subsites with the same pages. We will put canonicals so they reference the main pages. Do the meta descriptions have to be different for each of the three pages? How does Google handle meta data when using canonicals?
-
I don't really know any best practices in this topic. Me, in your case, I'd leave them just as they are now. Applying the canonicals, of course.
-
Thanks for your response.
Would you recommend as a best practice to include/repeat the same metadata on all the pages referencing the other (canonical) page or should we leave the metadata fields on the pages with canonicals blank?
-
Hi there,
Long story short: Nop it doesn't care that both pages with canonicals have the same meta data. It only matters the selected by the canonical.
Best luck.
GR. -
Hi there.
Basically, canonical link tells search engines to move all the ranking weight to a page, linked by canonical link. Therefore if google thinks that page A should be ranked for a given keyphrase, but this page A has a canonical link to another page B, page B will be considered as a ranking nominee and page A will be discarded. Which means that all meta data and other things WILL be taken from page B.
Hope this helps.
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
-
Duplicate Meta Titles and Descriptions Issue in Google Webmaster Tool
Hello All, We have one site named http://www.bargains-online.com.au/ & have some categories along with filter option on left side like filter by price & by brand, ect. We have already set rel canonical tags on all filtered pages, but still those all pages showing duplicate page titles and description warning in HTML Improvements section in Google Webmaster Tool. For Example: http://www.bargains-online.com.au/pressure-cleaners.html We've set rel canonical tag on below pages. http://www.bargains-online.com.au/pressure-cleaners/l/manufacturer:black-eagle.html http://www.bargains-online.com.au/pressure-cleaners/l/price:2,100.html http://www.bargains-online.com.au/pressure-cleaners/l/price:3,100.html Kindly request if anybody has any solutions for the same, please share with us. Thanks, Akshay
Technical SEO | | akshaydesai0 -
Google is not respecting the meta title
We're experiencing a peculiar situation with Google not respecting our meta <title>.</p> <p>As you can see in the first image (search result), the title <a href="http://open.iebschool.com/profesores/startups/">for the page</a> is a part of the content. This is relatevely normal for the description, but we never heard of Google doing this before.</p> <p>In the code, the <title> and meta description are correctly implemented.</p> <blockquote style="background-color: #f7f7f7; padding-top: 5px; margin-left: 0px; padding-left: 2px; padding-bottom: 5px; white-space: nowrap; overflow-y: auto; font-family: monospace; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> <p><meta name="description" content="Profesores, tutores, autores y docentes 2.0 de Open IEBS. Conoce su Biografía, experiencia, reputación, conexiones sociales y las valoraciones de alumnos."/><br /><title>Conoce los profesores, tutores, autores y docentes de Open IEBS.</title> In a further research, we discovered that the title which is using is an in anwith the following code (cleaned and simplified for the question): <hgroup> Pilar Soro
Technical SEO | | ofuente
0 Seguidor
Para poder seguir al Profesor, debes de registrarte aquí. Profesora y experta en redes sociales. Formadora de docentes, [...]
</hgroup> Note: we're correcting the code since this is quite messy, but it's the one we have now The point is that google has considered that this particular is more important than the title itself. This would make sense if we were looking for that name, but the search was simply "site:domain.com". Two things for which this is even more strange are the following: while all the /profesor/%category%/ has the same code, this only happens in some search results and not in all of them; why is it appearing in some pages, but respecting my title in others? the previous code is not the only one in the page, there are about 10 others and some are placed before and some are placed after; so, why this one and not the first or the last? What is more strange is why this article in particular and not any other of the 10 on the page since some of them are placed before and some of them are placed after. Provided this situation, we would like to know: is this a common situation? Is it happening to more people? why is it happening? Is it somehow related to , <hgroup>and ? why that piece of code and not any other article? and why is it only happening in some pages? more important, can it be corrected or can we take advantage of it somehow? Thank you in advance. Any light you can shed on this will be well received! AJ2CUSe.png?1?8232 </hgroup>0 -
Should we handle this redirect differently?
So our question is should we handle page redirection/rewriting in php or in .htaccess (with a specific problem we are running into outlined below). We have an ecommerce store in a subfolder of our site (example.com/store/). In the next folder down we have a group of widgets(www.example.com/store/widget-group1). Recently we put a .htaccess redirect in the top level folder (example.com/store/.htaccess), in order to re-write some URL’s and also 301 a page to another page. This seems to be negatively affecting our /widgets-group1/ subfolder however (organic traffic to example.com/store/widget-group1) took a nose dive 3 days after putting the .htaccess redirect in place on the /store/ folder and it has not recovered 8 days later). *Nothing appears outwardly wrong with the current setup to the eye when viewing the pages or requesting as googlebot (the only issue being the nose dive in organic traffic lol) *both subfolders are setup in apache config file to allow local overrides of .htaccess as follows: <directory store="" widget-group1="">Options -Indexes FollowSymLinks -MultiViews
Technical SEO | | altecdesign
AllowOverride All
Order allow,deny
allow from all</directory> <directory store="">Options -Indexes FollowSymLinks -MultiViews
AllowOverride All
Order allow,deny
allow from all</directory>0 -
Using Google Adwords is good?
I heard about that if you using adwords, google drops your ranking a little bit. Because of you already pay money for results. I think that is reasonable.
Technical SEO | | umutege0 -
Meta Refresh for No Javascript message
We're currently using meta refresh tag to check if JavaScript is enabled or not in users browsers. And if not then we redirect them to jsnotfound.aspx page: <metahttp-equiv="refresh"content="0;url= default.aspx?jse="0"/"></metahttp-equiv="refresh"content="0;url=> It's being flagged in SEOmoz tools so our developer tried solution highlighted in this Question: http://www.seomoz.org/q/meta-refresh-nojavascript-url ...but he couldn't get it to work. Is it really imperative we don't use the meta refresh for this purpose? Thanks in advance. Michael
Technical SEO | | LawrenceNeal0 -
Is rel=canonical needed for URLs with Google Analytics query strings?
If a page URL has Google Analytics query strings, does the page need a canonical tag? e.g., something.com/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=mar-2013-nsl I have rel=canonical on all our pages because some of them will be accessed via URLs that have non-Google strings. The strings are only for marketing purposes, not for identifying a specific page to display. e.g., something.com/?source=acme Should I only implement the canonical tag on the pages that might have non-Google marketing strings in the URL?
Technical SEO | | WayneBlankenbeckler0 -
Canonicalization - Some advice needed :)
Hi guys, To be honest, it's a little bit embarrassing to throw out this question but it's one of the weakest points of knowledge at the moment for me. I've tried to get a grasp of canonical URLs and what it all means. From my understanding, it's informing Google which page to take into consideration when there's the possibility for duplicate content. Right? However, with the site I'm working on I'm not sure if it would be worth putting site-wide and the impact it would have. Site I'm working on - http://bit.ly/N7eew7 With the nature of the site, there would be a lot of duplicated content as there's the possibility that several properties listed could have a similar address due to being in the same building etc. From what I can see, no canonical URL was setup on the homepage. The other variations of the homepage URL are 301 redirecting to thee http:/www. version. Can someone explain it all to me in simple terms? Honestly believe that I'm getting more confused by the minute. Thanks guys for your patience 🙂
Technical SEO | | MarkScully1