Some questions on Canonical tag AND 301 redirect
-
Hi everyone, I'm new here - always loved SEOMoz and glad to be part of the Pro community now.
I have 2 questions regarding the Canonical URL tag.
Some background info:
We used to run an OsCommerce store, and recently migrated to Magento. In doing so, we right away created 301 redirects of the old category pages (OsCommerce) to the new category pages (Magento) via the Magento admin. Example:
www.example.com/old-widget-category.html
301 redicrected to
www.example.com/new-widget-category.htmlIn Magento admin, we have enabled the Canonical tag for all product and category pages. Here's how Magento sets up the Canonical tag:
The URL of interest which we want to rank is:
www.example.com/new-widget-category.htmlHowever Magento sets up the canonical tag on this page to point to:
www.example.com/old-widget-category.htmlWhen using the SEOMoz On Page Report Card, it pick this up as an error because the Canonical tag is pointing to a different URL.
However, if we dig a little deeper, we see that the URL being pointed to
www.example.com/old-widget-category.html
has a 301 redirect to
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html
which is the URL we wan to rank.So because we set up a 301 redirect of the old-page to the new-page, on the new-page the canonical tag points to the old-page.
Question 1)
What are you opinions on this? Do you think this method of setting up the Canonical tag is acceptable?Second question...
We use pagination for category pages, so if we have 50 products in one category, we would have 5 pages of 10 products. The URL's would be:
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html (which is the SAME as ?p=1)
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=1
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=2
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=3
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=4
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=5Now ALL the URLs above have the canonical tag set as:
<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.example.com/new-widget-category" />However, the content of each page (page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) is different because different products are displayed. So far most what I read regarding the Canonical tag is that it is used for pages that have the same content but different URLs.
I would hope that Google would combine the content of all 5 pages and view the result as a single URL www.example.com/new-widget-category
Question 2) Is using the canonical tag appropriate in the case described above?
Thanks !
-
Most likely. Unless the parameters are greatly changing the content on the page, rather than simply sorting, you will want to block them or just use a canonical tag.
-
Will do.
the 301s will stay because they redirect the old (indexed and ranking) URL's to the new ones.
The Canonical Tags will all be removed.
Then 1 more question:
How do you suggest I deal with URL parameters that cause duplicate content. Some examples:?color=
?manufacturer=
?width=etc. We have hundreds of these - they are used to allow customers to filter or sort the product listings.
Should we set them to be ignored via Webmaster tools?
-
Drop the canonical, leave the 301.
Use rel=next and rel=prev for pagination: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/09/pagination-with-relnext-and-relprev.html
-
Yeah the 301 looks like it is correctly used, but I personally would not use canonical as well, in respect only to the redirect of "old pages" to "new pages"
In the instance of the products it does appear this is a good example of canonical needed.
All "staplers" pagination would canonical to the "Main" stapler page and so on and so forth.
This gets your users to the page to see the same product in a different color, but tells search engines that this is all the same "product". So for this "product" only the main page will result in search (page in which the canonicals for given product points to)
Hope this helps
once again #STOPSOPA
-
Shane is correct in his advice,
Q1
you dont need the canonical, if you did not have a 301 redirect, then the canonical should be on the old page pointing to the new. but as Shane said you dont need it when you have a 301 in place.
Q2
I would canonical to http://www.example.com/new-widget-category for all p1 to p5
As i wonder if the change of the products in the grid is enouth to make the pages unique. If you have sorting it just gets more messy
Your product pages will have this info for each product anyhow.
i would try to make the category page relevant for the catgory.
Rather then use rel=canonical I would use rel=next and rel=previous
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1663744
-
Thanks for the info Shane.
Regarding pagination:
let's say we sell staplers.?p=1 will be the first 10 stapler models
?p=2 will be stapler models 11-20
?p=3 will be stapler models 21-30
...and so on. Each page presents a different set of stapler models.
Keep in mind that each URL has the same Title and Meta Info.We could choose to show all staplers on a single page and eliminate pagination, but this would affect loading time.
Yes we incidentally use Canonical tags and 301 redirects, which were implemented for different reasons.
The 301 redirect was implemented to redirect from old category URLs on old website (no longer live) which were indexed and had good ranking to the new category URLs on the new website.
The canonical URL on the other hand was implemented in hope of avoiding duplicate content of the new URLs.
For example if you were to navigate to the URLwww.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=1
You would see the stapler models 1 to 10 of 50 (so 5 pages).
Now you can either go to the next pages, or you can 'filter'.Let's say you choose to filter by color, because you really want a red stapler, the resulting URL would be
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?color=red
You could now choose to filter by other characteristics or go to the next page (still with red filter on), so the URL would be
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?color=red?p=2
Again, since all that's happening here is either changing page or filtering the products, the Title and Meta Info is the same, but the URLs are different, and the selection of products being presented is also different.
-
Question 1
If i read it right it appears you are using 301 redirect and Canonical, Correct? If this is so, the use of Canonical is redundant (possibly ignored by Gbot) but could cause issues.
Question 2
From the way it is described.. It would appear the only true canonical is www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=1 and should have <link rel="canonical" href="http://www.example.com/new-widget-category" />
The others depending on differences should not UNLESS
It is the same product, just different colors or something that does not change the product and what it does. But only changes the physical appearance. This would be an "acceptable" difference and "OK" to use canonical
EXAMPLE;
If...
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=1 (Product in blue)
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=2 (Product in Red)
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=3 (ect...)
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=4 (ect...)
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=5 (Ect...)Then canonical is probably a good fit,
but if....
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=1 (Widget to tell time)
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=2 (Widget that cooks you breakfast)
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=3 So on and so forth..
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=4
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=5Then I would suggest not using the canonical and make the content on each page different
Hopefully i read your questions right and this helps
w00t!
#STOPSOPA please
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
-
Cleaning Up Bad 301 External Links From Old Site
A relatively new site I'm working on has been hit really hard by Panda, due to over optimization of 301 external links which include exact keyword phrases, from an old site. Prior to the Panda update, all of these 301 redirects worked like a charm, but now all of these 301's from the old url are killing the new site, because all the hyper-text links include exact keyword matches. A couple weeks ago, I took the old site completely down, and removed the htaccess file, removing the 301's and in effect breaking all of these bad links. Consequently, if one were to type this old url, you'd be directed to the domain registrar, and not redirected to the new site. My hope is to eliminate most of the bad links, that are mostly on spammy sites, that aren't worth linking to. My thought is these links would eventually disappear from G. My concern is that this might not work, because G won't re-index these links, because once they're indexed by G, they'll be there forever. My fear is causing me to conclude I should hedge my bets, and just disavow these sites using the disavow tool in WMT. IMO, the disavow tool is an action of last resort, because I don't want to call attention to myself, since this site doesn't have a manual penalty inflected on it. Any opinions or advise would be greatly appreciated.
Moz Pro | | alrockn0 -
Adding canonical still returns duplicate pages
According to SEOmoz, several of my campaigns show that I have duplicate pages (SEOmoz Errors). Upon reading more about how to resolve the issue, I followed SEOmoz's suggestion to add rel='canonical' <links>to each page. After the next SEOmoz crawl, the number of SEOmoz Errors related to duplicate pages remained the same and the number of SEOmoz notices shot up indicating that it recognized that I added rel='canonical'.</links> I'm still puzzled as to why the SEOmoz errors did not go down with respect to duplicate page errors after I added rel='canonical', especially since SEOmoz noticed that I added them. Can anyone explain this to me? Thanks,
Moz Pro | | MOZ2
Scott.0 -
Does the Crawl Diagnosis - Duplicate Page Content account for a canonical meta tags?
I see the same page listed 3 time (with different query params). But on each I have a meta tag pointing to the correct canonical url. By still seeing all three listed, does that mean there is an error with my meta tag?
Moz Pro | | Simantel0 -
Does a url with no trailing slash (/)need A special redirect to the same url with a trailing slash (/)
I recently moved a website to wordpress which the wordpress default includes the trailing slash (/) after ALL urls. My url structure used to look like: www.example.com/blue-widgets Now it looks like: www.example.com/blue-widgets/ Today I checked the urls using Open Site Explorer and below is what I discovered: www.example.com/blue-widgets returned all my links, authority, etc HOWEVER there is a note that says........."Oh Hey! it looks like that URL redirects to www.example.com/blue-widgets/. Would you like to see data for that URL instead?" When I click on the link to THAT URL I get a note that says_.....NO DATA AVAILABLE FOR THIS URL._ Does this mean that www.example.com/blue-widgets/ really has NO DATA? How do I fix this?
Moz Pro | | webestate0 -
Export & Email Keyword Report for Selected Tags
Is there a way to get a keyword ranking summary report emailed to me for specific tags?
Moz Pro | | CPollock0 -
Canonical issue in open site explorer
When I look at my back links in OSE, I see two landing pages on my site that are really the same page. www.mysite.com/ and www.mysite.com/(affiliate code here) These show different inbound link characteristics and page authority. The page in question has a rel=canonical tag. Am I doing something wrong?
Moz Pro | | EugeneF0 -
Initial Crawl Questions
Hello. I just joined and used the Crawl tool. I have many questions and hoping the community can offer some guidance. 1. I received an Excel file with 3k+ records. Is there a friendly online viewer for the Crawl report? Or is the Excel file the only output? 2. Assuming the Excel file is the only output, the Time Crawled is a number (i.e. 1305798581). I have tried changing the field to a date/time format but that did not work. How can I view the field as a normal date/time such as May 15, 2011 14:02? 3. I use the ™ symbol in my Title. This symbol appears in the output as a few ascii characters. Is that a concern? Should I remove the trademark symbol from my Title? 4. I am using XenForo forum software. All forum threads automatically receive a Title Tag and Meta Description as part of a template. The Crawl Test report shows my Title Tag and Meta Description as blank for many threads. I have looked at the source code of several pages and they all have clean Title tags and I don't understand why the Crawl Report doesn't show them. Any ideas? 5. In some cases the HTTP Status Code field shows a result of "3". Why does that mean? 6. For every URL in the Crawl Report there is an entry in the Referrer field. What exactly is the relationship between these fields? I thought the Crawl Tool would inspect every page on the site. If a page doesn't have a referring page is it missed? What if a page has multiple referring pages? How is that information displayed? 7. Under Google Webmaster Tools > Site Configurations > Settings > Parameter Handling I have the options set as either "Ignore" or "Let Google Decide" for various URL parameters. These are "pages" of my site which should mostly be ignored. For example a forum may have 7 headers, each on of which can be sorted in ascending or descending order. The only page that matters is the initial page. All the rest should be ignored by Google and the Crawl. Presently there are 11 records for many pages which really should only have one record due to these various sort parameters. Can I configure the crawl so it ignores parameter pages? I am anxious to get started on my site. I dove into the crawl results and it's just too messy in it's present state for me to pull out any actionable data. Any guidance would be appreciated.
Moz Pro | | RyanKent0 -
Where can I view all of the Questions that I have Subscribed to?
I recently asked a question about viewing the questions I have answered already: http://www.seomoz.org/q/where-can-i-view-all-of-the-questions-that-i-have-answered It turns out the link was right under my nose (but it appears a lot of people were having this issue). I'm now having the problem of not being able to see where I can view all the Q&As that I have subscribed to. Again, I may just be missing a link that's right in front of me but it certainly isn't obvious. Any help much appreciated!
Moz Pro | | NickPateman810