Redirecting Canonical 301s and Magento Website
-
I have an issue with a client's website where it has 3700+ pages, but roughly half of them are duplicates. Thankfully, the only difference between the original and the duplictes is the "?print" at the end of each URL (I suppose this is Magento's way of making a printable page version of the same page. I don't know, I didn't build it.)
My questions is, how can I get all the pages like this
http://www.mycompany.com/blah.html?print
to redirect to pages like this...
http://www.mycompany.com/blah.html
Also, do they NEED to be Canonical, or will a 301 redirect be sufficient.
Also, after having done this, if anybody knows, is there a way I can turn that feature off in Magento, because we're expanding our product line, and I don't want to have to keep chasing after these "?print" pages after the fact.
-
Late to this game, but just in case you're still waiting on your dev...
Magento has an automated add-on system called Magento Connect, and you can access it from your admin (unless the original installer disabled it on your account). You can just use that to install Yoast's plugin. Check out http://www.magentocommerce.com/magento-connect/canonical-url-for-magento.html
Aside from that, if you are using something after 1.4, you should have canonical built into your store (it's in the config section).
If you're not using something after 1.4, consider upgrading. It's not painless, but anything prior to 1.4.1 is pretty rough to use. I'm not surprised you've got bugs and general sadness.
-
Hehe, hey now, not all us developers are lazy
You know your system better than any of us do. My 1. and 2. are just the best-case order in which to get things done. Do what works for you and your site.
-
like I said, I will email your solution concerning the plugin to my web admin guy, but the reason why I'm kind of reticent to do that is it's more a matter of bureacracy (to be sensitive to his time constraints) rather than technical or lack of know-how. I want to get it done right, but I also want to get it done in a timely manner. But I will forward this to him. Thanks you sir.
-
I don't understand why you don't just use the rel="canonical" plugin I mentioned above... ?
-
thank you sir....I'll try to avoid the htaccess route then.
-
Yeah I guess this is the only way to go. Now I just got to get the webmaster to get around to it. (sigh)...
-
Yes to your first questions. Here's the process for each (as I see it):
1. Fix/remove the ability for system to generate ?print URL's and implement canonical tags; open beer and wait 'til search engines sort things out. Nothing more you can do here.
2. No fix to system so we still have ?print URL's. In this case, setup the 301's in your .htaccess file; however, as long as the system is still generating these ?print URLs, you will have to keep the redirects in the .htaccess in tact, permanently.
Untested:
RewriteEngine On
RewriteBase /
RewriteRule ^([^/]*).html?print$ /$1.html [L,NC,R=301]
-
I guess my question now is, just doing the htaccess route is a bad idea? in both 301s AND canonicals or just 301s? I guess I'm not looking for easy, but economical. Thanks for your responses.
-
I agree with THB on this, use rel="canonical" you simply want to say to the search engines "Hey this is the preferred URL for my content".
301's are for saying "Hey this page has permanently moved to a new page/site"
I would use the rel="canonical" plugin I posted for you above, it will automatically add the canonical tag for you, job done.
-
Yeah, I know, right. The problem is, I found this out only AFTER I bought the PRO version and mapped out the entirety of the site. Some of those ?print URLs are now indexed in the SEs. So I agree with nipping this problem in the bud (or the root, whichever one prefers), but I still need to know how to do it via the htaccess. In other words, I have to go backwards and take care of the rankings, THEN figure out how to turn it off (and I can go to the Magento forums for that).
-
So, assuming this works, can I eventually remove the ".html?print" versions of the pages after the SEs have changed the URLs in their indices?
also, I'm not getting the impression it's going to save me time on specifying different pages (it may save time, I'm not sure), but in the chance it doesn't or the plugin fails to do as advertised, what is the htaccess option for this? Because at least, in this case, I can see the immediacy in it AND you can do canonical rewrites FROM the htaccess.
My situation is, I'm not THAT advanced in wildcards to make this happen (otherwise, I'd do it myself via just trial and error until it works) AND I myself don't have access to the site (the webmaster does, whose part time) and I have a choice between "Hey, here's several (or one line) of code to put into htaccess to resolve this problem" OR "can you go through and implement this plug to do the Canonical redirects on every page, oh and by the way, please back up first."
So it's not merely JUST a technical problem or a know-how problem, it's also a bureaucratic problem that can mean the difference between getting it done in a few minutes, and it could take two weeks to make happen depending on this person's perception.
-
Just to clarify. If there is in fact no difference between the pages (as you originally stated), then please just use the canonical tag. As much as you might want to setup 301 redirects, they would not be the way to go in this case. Trust me.
Otherwise, here is what I would do, honestly: find out why the ?print is causing information to be displayed improperly in some cases. If it's accessing the same db tables using the same queries, then that shouldn't be happening. I'd fix that, and implement the canonical tags, and wait it out. That would be the easiest approach and most beneficial with the least impact to your site and any rankings.
If this is something your not capable of fixing (not sure if you're proficient with coding, etc), then you can setup 301's as a 'hack', but they should not be left in permanently as the process in which I stated just above is the best way to resolve the issue.
In order to assist you with any .htaccess markup, you'll need to provide some examples of your URL's, and whether they have any common identifiers.
-
OK - I was basing my answers on what you said, "the only difference between the original and the duplictes is the "?print" at the end of each URL"
If there is in fact different content on each page, and the ?print page is the one with the errors, then you should remove the ability for ?print pages to even be generated in the first place instead of having them constantly redirecting user/bots. Forever 301 re-directions can hurt you down the road.
Once you've removed the ability for users/bots to find and access the ?print pages, then setup the 301's and insert the canonical tags.
-
It looks like this plugin will add the rel="canonical" tag for you automatically: http://yoast.com/tools/magento/canonical/
View the source code after you have installed it to confirm it's working as expected.
-
I was answering this Kjay's response while this one was coming down the pipeline. I get you on the fact if they were TRULY identical, but the reason I wanted to do the 301s is because more than likely, the Magento engine is faulty, and I've found situaitons where the prices are different between the two versions, or the images and text haven't been updated, etc. etc., hence, the need for a 301
-
I guess my question is, if I use JUST the canonical, then the SEs will get around to changing the address, but will still go to the "?print" pages until that time.
Also, the Magento help aide on that said I had to do it with EACH individual page. It's going to be especially time-consuming to have to go back out into the admin, go back into the admin, and check to see EVERY time the page that I'm canonizing is the right html version. I think this is where accessing the htaccess will save me a bunch of time (I still have to change the title tags on the remaining original 1500 pages, as well as find out from the Magento site, to access the H1 tags in the templates).
If I use the basic 301 redirect, I get the benefit of the immediate redirect, but I fail to see the downside of having to "endure" the 301 redirect other than additional rules for the browser to access the server. I eventually want to get RID of these "?print" pages because I'm getting the feeling that prices won't update as reliably on the ".html?print" version of the pages, update images (which we HAVE had trouble with in the past) etc. etc. And there's also the possibility that people may still access those ?print pages even if I did just do a canonical. It's just better to admin and SEO 1500+ pages as opposed to 1500+ pages and their duplicates.
I guess, what I'm looking for is, more than likely, the syntax command that's going to include a wildcard function to accomodate everything between "http://www.mycompany.com/" and ".html?print" or ".html". What would that look like?
-
Agreed
-
Ya, this is what I was talking about. Just a standard canonical html tag inserted into the framework.
That will clear everything up for you (might take a wee bit, but Google will recognize it right away).
No need for .htaccess whatsoever since the content is identical. If the content were different, ie. the ?print page showed a completely different style format, then sure, setup some 301's to get the user's to the right page. But not needed for your situation.
-
I would just add:
rel="canonical" href="http://www.mycompany.com/blah.html" />
No need to add 301's.
This might be useful it's Magento specific: http://www.magentocommerce.com/wiki/adding_canonical_url_to_cms_pages
-
Okay, so if I were in the htaccess file, what would it look like?
would it be a Query string rewrite?
RewriteEngine On
_ RewriteBase /_
RewriteCond %{QUERY_STRING} ^(*)$
RewriteRule ^()html?print$ http://www.mycompany.com/()html$ [R=301]
or just a straight one line redirect
Redirect 301 /()html?print http://www.mycompany.com/().html
-
Canonical will suffice as it is basically a 301 anyways. Cleaner too as there is no actual redirect for the user, or bot, to endure.
You can also set it up in Google Webmaster Tools under 'Site Configuration > URL Parameters' to ignore that parameter; however, using the canonical tag will more than suffice in this case.
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
-
Recovering from an open redirect
From a previous company we have inherited a domain which once contained an open redirect redirect.magnet.me. Even though this domain has been returning a 410 for every single request directed at it for the last few months, we continue to see new links popping up in Google which refer to this domain https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&q=%22redirect.magnet.me%22 Currently we just keep disavowing these links, but at the same time they keep appearing in our Moz.com tooling, being unable to disavow those links here. Does anybody have any successful tips how to deal with this scenario, compared to only disavow new links after the fact?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rogier_slag0 -
Redirecting traffic to https
Hey! i was wondering, should i force all traffic to https address? i know that overall a better secured website will rank better since it earns more trust from users which means less bounce rate and the list of benefits is endless..
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SharonEKG
but should i FORCE ALL traffic to a https? or maybe only force a http to https? or not at all?2 -
Why isn't the canonical tag on my client's Magento site working?
The reason for this mights be obvious to the right observer, but somehow I'm not able to spot the reason why. The situation:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Inevo
I'm doing an SEO-audit for a client. When I'm checking if the rel=canonical tag is in place correctly, it seems like it: view-source:http://quickplay.no/fotball-mal.html?limit=15) (line nr 15) Anyone seing something wrong with this canonical? When I perform a site:http://quickplay.no/ search, I find that there's many url's indexed that ought to have been picked up by the canonical-tag: (see picture) ..this for example view-source:http://quickplay.no/fotball-mal.html?limit=15 I really can't see why this page is getting indexed, when the canonical-tag is in place. Anybody who can? Sincerely 🙂 GMdWg0K0 -
Is it worth redirecting?
Hello! Is there any wisdom or non-wisdom in taking old websites and blogs that may not be very active, but still get some traffic, and redirecting them to a brand new website? The new website would be in the same industry, but not the same niche as the older websites. Would there be any SEO boost to the new website by doing this? Or would it just hurt the credibility of the new website?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dieselprogrammers0 -
Redesigned Website
Hi, I have redesigned my website in html whereas it was in .asp earlier. I have resubmitted my google sitemap but it still showing me old site pages in search except home page. My question is how i can immediately change my web presence. How i can get the benefit of my .asp page ranks? In addition my website still alive with .asp. What should be the strategy, should i remove this websites or have to redirect all pages to new. If i make 301 redirection then will it cause any issue in SEO, ranking etc ? Thx
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 1akal0 -
Website not being indexed after relocation
I have a scenario where a 'draft' website was built using Google Sites, and published using a Google Sites sub domain. Consequently, the 'same' website was rebuilt and published on its own domain. So effectively there were two sites, both more or less identical, with identical content. The first website was thoroughly indexed by Google. The second website has not been indexed at all - I am assuming for the obvious reasons ie. that Google is viewing it as an obvious rip-off of the first site / duplicate content etc. I was reluctant to take down the first website until I had found an effective way to resolve this issue long-term => ensuring that in future Google would index the second 'proper' site. A permanent 301 redirect was put forward as a solution - however, believe it or not, the Google Sites platform has no facility for implementing this. For lack of an alternative solution I have gone ahead and taken down the first site. I understand that this may take some time to drop out of Google's index, however, and I am merely hoping that eventually the second site will be picked up in the index. I would sincerely appreciate an advice or recommendations on the best course of action - if any! - I can take from here. Many thanks! Matt.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | collectedrunning0 -
Link Reclimation & Redirects
Hello, I'm in the middle of a link reclamation project wherein we're identifying broken links, links pointing to dupe content etc. I found a forgotten co-brand which is effectively dupe content across 8 sub-domains, some of which have a significant number of links (200+ linking domains | 2k+ in-bound links). Question for the group is what's the optimal redirect option? Option 1: set 301 and maintain 1:1 URL mapping will pass all equity to applicable PLPs and theoretically improve rank for related keyword(s). requires a bit more configuration time and will likely have small effect on rank given links are widely distributed across URLs. Option 2: set 301 to redirect all requests to the associated sub-domain e.g. foo.mybrand.cobrand.com/page1.html and foo.mybrand.cobrand.com/page2 both redirect to foo.mybrand.com/ will accumulate all equity at the sub-domain level which theoretically will be roughly distributed throughout underlying pages and will limit risk of penalty to that sub-domain. Option 3: set 301 to redirect all requests to our homepage. easiest to configure & maintain, will accumulate the maximum equity on a priority page which should positively affect domain authority. run risk of being penalized for accumulating links en mass, risk penalty for spammy links on our primary sub-domain www, won't pass keyword specific equity to applicable pages. To be clear, I've done an initial scrub of anchor text and there were no signs of spam. I'm leaning towards #3, but interested in others perspectives. Cheers,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PCampolo
Stefan0 -
Reducing pages with canonical & redirects
We have a site that has a ridiculous number of pages. Its a directory of service providers that is organized by city and sub-category of the vertical. Each provider is on the main city page, then when you click on a category, it will only show those folks who offer that subcategory of this service. example: colorado/denver - main city page colorado/denver/subcat1 - subcategory page There are 37 subcategories. So, 38 pages that essentially have the same content - minus a provider or two - for each city. There are approx 40K locations in our database. So rough math puts us at 1.5 million results pages, with 97% of those pages being duplicate content! This is clearly a problem. But many of these obscure pages do rank and get traffic. A fair amount when you aggregate all these pages together. We are about to go through a redesign and want to consolidate pages so we can reduce the dupe content, get crawl budget allocated to more meaningful pages, etc. Here's what I'm thinking we should do with this site, and I would love to have your input: Canonicalize Before the redesign use the canonical tag on all the sub-category pages and push all the value from those pages (colorado/denver/subcat1, /subcat2, /subcat3... etc) to the main city page (colorado/denver/subcat1) 301 Redirect On the new site (we're moving to a new CMS) we don't publish the duplicate sub-category pages and do 301 redirects from the sub-category URLs to the main city page urls. We'd still have the sub-categories (keywords) on-page and use some Javascript filtering to narrow results. We could cut to the chase and just do the redirects, but would like to use canonicalization as a proof of concept internally at my company that getting rid of these pages is a good thing, or at least wont have a negative impact on traffic. i.e. by the time we are ready to relaunch traffic and value has been transfered to the /state/city page Trying to create the right plan and build my argument. Any feedback you have will help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | trentc0