I still don't understand how rel=canonical works. Help?
-
So here's the deal. I write for many different outlets. I also have many different pages on my blog that have duplicates (authorized, of course). On my blog, I have many different pages that redirect to "the original" content.
I've only recently discovered the existence of rel=canonical. However I don't understand how it works. I have very specific questions. Can anyone help?
-
If, on my blog, I have a blog post that's the original. And another website has the same content, used with authorization. If I want to tell search engines that the original content is on MY blog, what can I do? Is the only solution to ask the owner of the other blog to add a rel=canonical in the header of the specific post?
-
If, on my blog, I have a blog post that's NOT the original. Do I simply add rel=canonical to the header, then add a link to the original in the body?
-
If, on my blog, I have THE FIRST 300 WORDS of a blog post, then add a link saying "to read the whole article, click here" with a link pointing to the original, do I need to have a rel=canonical tag somewhere? Does it HAVE to be in the header?
-
-
Hi Cedriklizotte,
No, there is no need to put the second link Click here in the body. Only the first link would be enough to put in the section.
Regards,
Amit Rathi
-
Thank you very much for your detailed answer.
One last question: do I need to put BOTH in the header and Click here in the body? Or am I confused again?
Thanks again
-
Hi Cedriklizotte,
As per your queries, you have recently discovered about the rel="canonical" tag so let's try to understand this first. As you have mentioned that some of the pages redirect to the "original content". So its better to put the rel="canonical" tag to the original link because that'll be the preferred URL when it comes to tell the search engines about which page to consider as the "original content". So this code would look like:
And put this code in the section of the page.
Now, let's try to answer your questions one by one:
Question: If, on my blog, I have a blog post that's the original. And another website has the same content, used with authorization. If I want to tell search engines that the original content is on MY blog, what can I do? Is the only solution to ask the owner of the other blog to add a rel=canonical in the header of the specific post?
Answer: In this scenario, as you suggested its better to ask the owner of the other blog to add a rel=canonical with the link to your blog in the section of the specific post.
Question: If, on my blog, I have a blog post that's NOT the original. Do I simply add rel=canonical to the header, then add a link to the original in the body?
Answer: You should mark up the page with the rel=canonical tag in the section in the format that I have mentioned.
If the body has a CTA (Call To Action) button that takes to the original post then put the link there and no need to put rel=canonical tag there because you have already put the rel=canonical tag in that page with the preferred URL or original link.
Question: If, on my blog, I have THE FIRST 300 WORDS of a blog post, then add a link saying "to read the whole article, click here" with a link pointing to the original, do I need to have a rel=canonical tag somewhere? Does it HAVE to be in the header?
Answer: Yes, better to put the rel=canonical in the header.
Question: Can rel=canonical be used in the
_[Answer: Yes, rel=canonical is always used in the <href=>element format of a link in order to tell search engines that the original of content is actually on the other blog.</href=>
Question: What penalties are included with having duplicate content of my work everywhere on the web? I've been trying to find specifics, but can't.
Answer: Just check this link: https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2008/09/demystifying-duplicate-content-penalty.html from Google Webmasters blog about the duplicate content penalties and you'll get a fair idea about the specifics.
I hope this would help.
Regards,
Amit Rathi](code)_
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
-
Content that's behind CSS..
For content that's been loaded onto the page.. but it requires a click for it to be revealed.. as in a slider, or a tab, to save space or for a page's organization.. what are your thoughts on Google counting or weighting this content? It would make sense for Google to give it partial or no weighting as if Google attributes the content to being there, its confusion for the user to land on the page and have to find it/click around to find it.. Sorry if this is an obvious question to SEOs.. I've always assumed as long as it was loaded, it'd be mostly counted.. but I'm beginning to doubt my assumption. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | speedcommerce0 -
I'm struggling with ranking for a really important keyword!
I'm helping with SEO for a client who has a very old website, but is updated regularly and has lots of relevant content for the keywords i'm looking to rank for. For other keywords we are able to get to position #3 on Google, yet for this one - the name of the town the website is about - we rank on page 15 of Google. I haven't done anything differently between the two and I really can't see why we can't get there. I've just done the monthly report for the client, and it's showing as being at position #1 for all of July - I checked during that month, and it wasn't. And then on 1st August it dropped to page 20 of Google. I understand slight fluctuations but this is pretty major. Can anyone help?
On-Page Optimization | | Cubiqdesign0 -
Putting review aggregation in product's navigation
Do you guys think it's a bad idea to put a review aggregation page in a product's navigation? Such as: "Which Brand of Men's Shampoo Is Best for You?" Rand suggests against it in this Whiteboard Friday as it interferes with a product's funnel, but I wonder if including it in navigation will give a domain and that page increased authority for a head keyword, such as "men's shampoo." What do you guys think?
On-Page Optimization | | Edward_Sturm0 -
Duplicate URL errors when URL's are unique
Hi All, I'm running through MOZ analytics site crawl report and it is showing numerous duplicate URL errors, but the URLs appear to be unique. I see that the majority of the URL's are the same, but shouldn't the different brands make them unique to one another? http://www.sierratradingpost.com/clearance~1/clothing~d~5/tech-couture~b~33328/ http://www.sierratradingpost.com/clearance~1/clothing~d~5/zobha~b~3072/ Any ideas as to why these would be shown as duplicate URL errors?
On-Page Optimization | | STP_SEO0 -
Does 'XXX' in Domain get filtered by Google
I have a friend that has xxx in there domain and they are a religious based sex/porn addiction company but they don't show up for the queries that they are optimized against. They have a 12+ year old domain, all good health signs in quality links and press from trusted companies. Google sends them adult traffic, mostly 'trolls' and not the users they are looking for. Has anyone experienced domain word filtering and have a work around or solution? I posted in the Google Webmaster help forums and that community seems a little 'high on their horses' and are trying to hard to be cool. I am not too religious and don't necessarily support the views of the website but just trying to help a friend of a friend with a topic that I have never encountered. here is the url: xxxchurch.com Thanks, Brian
On-Page Optimization | | Add3.com0 -
Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical
When I'm checking my page on SEOmoz should I use http://www. or http:// or www. or just keyword.com? And I get this for my check Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical Moderate fix <dl> <dt>Canonical URL</dt> <dd>XXX</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>If the canonical tag is pointing to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. Make sure you're targeting the right page (if this isn't it, you can reset the target above) and then change the canonical tag to reference that URL.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>We check to make sure that IF you use canonical URL tags, it points to the right page. If the canonical tag points to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. If you've not made this page the rel=canonical target, change the reference to this URL. NOTE: For pages not employing canonical URL tags, this factor does not apply.</dd> <dd>I have absolutely NO idea what this means 😞
On-Page Optimization | | 678648631264
</dd> </dl>0 -
Is it good to have dashes in url's
When using keywords in url's for internal pages, isn't it a good idea to use dashes or underscores in the url between the keywords?
On-Page Optimization | | BradBorst0 -
The SEOmoz crawler is being blocked by robots.txt need help
SEO moz is showing me that the robot.txt is blocking content on my site
On-Page Optimization | | CGR-Creative0