How to fix duplicate content for homepage and index.html
-
Hello,
I know this probably gets asked quite a lot but I haven't found a recent post about this in 2018 on Moz Q&A, so I thought I would check in and see what the best route/solution for this issue might be. I'm always really worried about making any (potentially bad/wrong) changes to the site, as it's my livelihood, so I'm hoping someone can point me in the right direction.
Moz, SEMRush and several other SEO tools are all reporting that I have duplicate content for my homepage and index.html (same identical page).
According to Moz, my homepage (without index.html) has PA 29 and index.html has PA 15. They are both showing Status 200. I read that you can either do a 301 redirect or add rel=canonical
I currently have a 301 setup for my http to https page and don't have any rel=canonical added to the site/page. What is the best and safest way to get rid of duplicate content and merge the my non index and index.html homepages together these days? I read that both 301 and canonical pass on link juice but I don't know what the best route for me is given what I said above.
Thank you for reading, any input is greatly appreciated!
-
OK, Paul, I hear what you are saying. It's a very open and obvious diss.
I'm not sure what you are saying makes any difference to the argument that the canonical way here is not the way to go. I was explaining in the simplest way, I would not want, and I'm sure you would not want either, a live page like this - the home page, live and canonicalised.
(It's a given that the canonical works like a 301, passing link juice to the preferred version.)
So thanks but it makes no difference - delete & 301 every time.
Google is heightening its distrust of canonicals - the new Seach Console tool reveals which pages are the preferred canonical and it's something of a surprise to SEOs!
If you feel like playing top trumps again then why not PM me? - it's so much better and the uninitiated do not need to see it!
Cheers Nigel
-
A proper canonical tag does a lot more than "just be telling Google not to rank it" When used properly (i.e. pages that truly do contain the same content), the canonicalised page passes its ranking signals back to the canonical source.
I agree with Kristina - while a 301 would be preferable (it's a directive, while canonical tags are taken as suggestions), a canonical tag would be vastly better than not doing anything about the issue. At least until the dev can get the problem with the 301-redirect properly resolved.
Paul
-
It's best practice to redirect, but if that's not an option, the canonical route should help the problem a lot! You'll probably lose some link equity with this route, but it should clear up duplicate content issues from Google's side.
-
Hi Dre
If you just do a canonical then the page will still be live, you will just be telling Google not to rank it. Best practice is to remove it all together and 301. It is bad practice having more than one version of your home page, (any page) live!
Regards Nigel
-
Thank you so much for all the responses. So it sounds like 301 redirect through htaccess is the way to go. What is the difference between using the 301 through htaccess vs using rel=canonical in my case? Does the 301 provide better link juice vs rel=canonical or is canonical just not applicable in this case? Thanks for all the replies and helpful suggestions again!
EDIT: I spoke to my developer (who is hosting and maintaining my site now).. he said he tried to do 301 through htaccess but it seems to be crashing the site (and trust me he is very good at what he does). Part of the problem is that my site is VERY old (originally build about 10 years ago and NOT updated once since).. he has been slowly updating and cleaning up the site slowly and he will try to figure out why the 301 is crashing the site and not working but in the mean time how safe is it to use rel=canonical instead of a 301?
Thanks again!
-
Hi dre
Your site really shouldn't be generating an index.html in the first place but if it is you must make sure that there is a 301 in the htaccess file sending all traffic to the single homepage URL as Lynn correctly points out this will be a permanent redirect.
It is very simple to do. Both versions are treated as separate pages (as http and https) so you are essentially showing a duplicate site to Google so your rankings will be terrible until you change.
Regards Nigel
-
Hello there,
You can use .htaccess URL rewrite to remove all the .html from your URL, here's the rewrite rules.
RewriteEngine On
RewriteRule ^index.html$ / [R=301,L]
RewriteRule ^(.*)/index.html$ /$1/ [R=301,L]Once you added this rules you should also fix all your internal links make sure they link to the URL without .html
Hope this helps,
Joseph Yap
-
"I currently have a 301 setup for my http to https page" - great! Also, you should check if your inner pages redirecting from HTTP-versions to HTTPS too.
index.html should redirect to the homepage main version with 301 Permanent Redirect.
-
Google consider HTTP and HTTPS as two separate protocols. Since the contents are same on both versions, google bots consider it as duplicate content. Adding a canonical URL will solve this problem. If you have any doubts, feel free to ask.
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
-
Question about Homepage Title
Hi there, I recently made a change to the title URL for my site, and it changed how Google displayed my sitemap. Before it showed the most common sites, and now it simply links to 4 of them below the domain URL without descriptions. I have attached images below which shows my problem. I hope this is the right section for this question. Thanks! 5ypdnY2 4u2HAia
On-Page Optimization | | One20 -
Does this index well
hi i have been looking at this template but as the content will be generated from their database will it index well - am i better to build a static equivalent using something like visual composer as i am not that technical: http://realhomes.inspirythemes.biz/listing/
On-Page Optimization | | neilhenderson0 -
Is this hidden content?
Hi all, I was wondering if the homepage of www.dirtylooks.com has hidden content in a search engines eyes. There is some text which appears underneath a tile called "hair tools" that has to be scrolled in order to be viewed by a visitor. As this isn't the typical white on white or off page by CSS hidden content are we in danger of being penalised?
On-Page Optimization | | BenfromBNKR0 -
Duplicate content on partner site
I have a trade partner who will be using some of our content on their site. What's the best way to prevent any duplicate content issues? Their plan is to attribute the content to us using rel=author tagging. Would this be sufficient or should I request that they do something else too? Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | ShearingsGroup0 -
Google Indexed = 35, 445 pages, Bing Indexed = 243 pages... Why?
Dear MozSquad, Can anyone check our site and let me know if there's anything super apparent that would cause Bing to treat us like a bum on the street? I recently made some structural changes which really helped with Google, but Bing didn't even budge. It's a lot harder to keep up with all the SEO initiatives I have in mind with it being a small start-up where I'm responsible for planning the entire Internet Marketing campaign, giving constant input on UX and site design, etc on top of 900 other things, so I figured it'd be a good time to use The Moz to help a brother out. Ideas? Domain: homeandgardendesignideas.com (yeah, I know it's a little long =P)
On-Page Optimization | | zDucketz0 -
Meta Data definition for multiple pages. Potential duplicate content risk?
Hi all, One of our clients needs to redefine their meta title and description tags. They publish very similar information almost every day, so the structure they propose is the following: Structure 1: Type of Analysis + periodicity + data + brand name Examples 1: Monthly Market Analysis, 1/5/2012 - Brand Name Weekly Technical Analysis, 7/5/2012 - Brand Name Structure 2: Company Name + investment recommendation + periodicity Example 2: Iberdrola + investment recommendation (this text doesn't vary) + 2T12 (wich means 2012, 2nd trimestrer) Regarding meta description they want to follow a similar approach, replicating every time the same info with a slight variation for each publication. I'm afraid this may cause a duplicate content problem because of the resemblance of every "Market Analysis" done or every "Investment recommendation" done in the future. My initial suggestion for them is to define specific and unique meta data for each page, but this is not possible for them given the time it takes to do it for every page. Finally, I ask them to specify the data in each meta title of content published, in order to add something different each time and avoid duplicate content penalty. Will this be enough to avoid duplicate content issues? Thanks in advance for your help folks! Alex
On-Page Optimization | | elisainteractive0 -
Duplicate Page Titles
I have over 200 duplicate page titles on a site that I am working on. Does putting a date at the end of some of them make it a unique enough title?
On-Page Optimization | | SavingSense0 -
Duplicate product urls
Our site automatically creates shorter urls for the products. There is a rel canonical tag in place, but webmaster tools shows these urls have duplicate title tags. Here is an example: http://www.colemanfurniture.com/holden-desk.htm http://www.colemanfurniture.com/writing-desks-secretary-desks/holden-desk.htm Should the longer url be redirected to the shorter one?
On-Page Optimization | | thappe0