Will canonical tag get rid of duplicate page title errors?
-
I have a directory on my website, paginated in groups of 10. On page 2 of the results, the title tag is the same as the first page, as it is on the 3rd page and so on. This is giving me duplicate page title errors. If i use rel=canonical tags on the subsequent pages and href the first page of my results, will my duplicate page title warnings go away?
thanks.
-
this is a great idea. I think that the view all is most likely my best option.
-
One other maybe even better solution would be to implement a see all button, to list all products under one page for the engines. Look here: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html
I think this is specially for you
-
Welcome
-
Of course, we just change the titles manually for each page. Pretty easy to do.
-
thanks for your response. No the second or third pages do not bring any added benefit to a user visiting via SE. This should remove over 100 errors, so thank you.
-
They will definately go away with canonicals, but take page content into consideration as well. Can the second or third page bring a different value for the visitor? May it appear in the serps for other search querries than the first? If this is the case than with canonilizing second, third etc pages you stop them from ranking in google. If they do not bring additional user benefit, than be no afraid to plce the canonicals.
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 pages coming from links from the login page - what should we do about them?
This is a follow on to an earlier question which was well answered by Dirk Ceuppens regarding abnormal crawl issues. We are seeing that the issues relating to Duplicate Pages are coming from links from the login page which shows information about where the user was redirected from. For example, if the visitor is not logged on and wishes to wish-list an item, they will be redirected to the login page, with the item code and intended action in the url; which can then continue on to the desired page once logged on. The MOZ crawler is seeing these pages as having Duplicated Content whilst they are all the same apart from a piece of information in the URL. Should we be blocking these duplications? Are they a risk to us? What should we be doing? Many thanks, Sarah
Moz Pro | | Mutatio_Digital0 -
I have a duplicate content on my Moz crawler, but google hasn't indexed those pages: do I still need to get rid of the tags?
I received an urgent error from the Moz crawler that I have duplicate content on my site due to the tags I have. For example: http://www.1forjustice.com/graves-amendment/ The real article found here: http://www.1forjustice.com/car-accident-rental-car/ I didn't think this was a big deal, because when I looked at my GWT these pages weren't indexed (picture attached). Question: should I bother fixing this from an SEO perspective? If Google isn't indexing the pages, then am I losing link juice? 6c2kxiZ
Moz Pro | | Perenich0 -
What's my best strategy for Duplicate Content if only www pages are indexed?
The MOZ crawl report for my site shows duplicate content with both www and non-www pages on the site. (Only the www are indexed by Google, however.) Do I still need to use a 301 redirect - even if the non-www are not indexed? Is rel=canonical less preferable, as usual? Facts: the site is built using asp.net the homepage has multiple versions which use 'meta refresh' tags to point to 'default.asp'. most links already point to www Current Strategy: set the preferred domain to 'www' in Google's Webmaster Tools. set the Wordpress blog (which sits in a /blog subdirectory) with rel="canonical" to point to the www version. Ask programmer to add 301 redirects from the non-www pages to the www pages. Ask programmer to use 301 redirects as opposed to meta refresh tags & point all homepage versions to www.site.org. Does this strategy make the most sense? (Especially considering the non-indexed but existent non-www pages.) Thanks!!
Moz Pro | | kimmiedawn0 -
Problem with Rankings and On-page Optimization
Hi SEOZ 🙂 I have a question regarding the Rankings and On-page Optimization in the seomoz Campaign Manager. I have setup a website url for examle: www.keyword.com After that created a list of all the target Keywords, that I want to reach within my Website: keyword-a, keyword-b, keyword-c and so on... Then I did a On-Page Analysis for all the urls with the specific keywords. keyword-a: www.keyword.com/keyword-a/ keyword-b: www.keyword.com/keyword-b/ keyword-c: www.keyword.com/keyword-c/ and so on... Most of the urls got the A grade. Now after the Website hast launched and got crawled, I have a problem with the Rankings and the On-page Optimization. The Rankings for my Keywords and also the Grades at the On-page Optimization are only shown for my Start/Homepage: www.keyword.com NOT for the urls that are specific for a Keyword for example: www.keyword.com/keyword-a/ Also the Grades are shown for the Keywords but again only in combination with my Start/Homepage www.keyword.com NOT for www.keyword.com/keyword-a/ What is the problem? Bye, Alex
Moz Pro | | krseo0 -
Does the SEOMoz weekly crawl that highlights no meta description tag, take into account if there is a meta robots noindex,follow tag on the pages it indicates the missing meta descriptions?
The weekly crawl website report is telling me that there are pages that have missing meta description tags, yet I've implemented meta robots tags to 'noindex, follow' those pages which are visible in those page source files. As far as Google Is concerned, surely this then won't be a problem since it is being instructed NOT to consider these specific pages for indexing. I am assuming that the weekly SEOmoz website crawl is simply throwing the missing meta description crawl findings into its report without itself observing that the particluar URL references contain the meta robots 'noindex,follow' tag ???? Appreciate if you can clairfy if this is the case. It would help me understand that (at least in terms of my efforts towards Google) your own crawl doesn't observe the meta robots tag instruction, hence the resultant report's flagging the discrepancy.
Moz Pro | | callassist0 -
Have I got Rel Canonical or not?
I have 180 warnings of rel=canonical. The exact wording says this: Using rel=canonical suggests to search engines which URL should be seen as canonical. First - I don't know what that means - is that a good thing of bad thing? Second - Because of the above question, Im not sure if I have it or should have or it do have it but shouldn't. Which should I have? What should it look like? How do I fix it? Also, I have notices that say 'issue: 301 redirect' and a line about what a 301 redirect is. Again, do I have it, or not have it, should I have it? Do I have it but shouldn't?
Moz Pro | | borderbound0 -
Domain vs Page
I see a lot of different metrics pointing to domain or page. What is the difference between these two definitions?
Moz Pro | | Gfrink0 -
Reducing duplicate content
Callcatalog.com is a complaint directory for phone numbers. People post information on the phone calls they get. Since there are many many phone numbers, obviously people haven't posted information on ALL of the phone numbers, THUS I have many phone numbers with zero content. SEOMoz is telling me that pages with zero content looks like duplicate content with each other.. The only difference between two pages that have zero coments is the title and phone number embedded in the page. For example, http://www.callcatalog.com/phones/view/413-563-3263 is a page that has zero comments.. I don't want to remove these zero comment phone number pages from the directory since many people find the pages via a phone number search. Here's my question: what can I do to make google / seomoz think that thexe zero comment pages is not dupliicate content?
Moz Pro | | seo_ploom0