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
-
Rookie question re Moz Crawl errors after deleting a property from console.
Hi all, I stupidly removed the "http" url of my one website a few days back (it is one of three, the other two being the https), then re-added it around a day later and, while google console isn't reporting back any errors, Moz Crawl is going to town on this now for one critical "4xx" issues, canonicals and various other content issues that I addressed days previously...last Moz crawl performed an hour ago, url deleted and re-added two days ago. I have resubmitted a sitemap, will this smooth itself out or shall I go and make changes? Many thanks in advance.
Moz Pro | | UkPod0 -
Pages with Temporary Redirects on pages that don't exist!
Hi There Another obvious question to some I hope. I ran my first report using the Moz crawler and I have a bunch of pages with temporary redirects as a medium level issue showing up. Trouble is the pages don't exist so they are being redirected to my custom 404 page. So for example I have a URL in the report being called up from lord only knows where!: www.domain.com/pdf/home.aspx This doesn't exist, I have only 1 home.aspx page and it's in the root directory! but it is giving a temp redirect to my 404 page as I would expect but that then leads to a MOZ error as outlined. So basically you could randomize any url up and it would give this error so I am trying to work out how I deal with it before Google starts to notice or before a competitor starts to throw all kinds at my site generating these errors. Any steering on this would be much appreciated!
Moz Pro | | Raptor-crew0 -
Open Site Explorer detects links from a site that redirects to it? How is this possible?
I was checking external links to a site: scte-brasilien.de/ and was wondering why there are so many links pointing from another domain (reisen-nach-brasilien.com/) although it redirects to scte-brasilien.de/? So when checking the redirecting domain OSE knows its redirecting... The URL you've entered redirects to another URL. We're showing results for scte-brasilien.de/ since it is likely to have more accurate link metrics. See data forreisen-nach-brasilien.com/ instead? How is this possible? best regards
Moz Pro | | inlinear
Holger0 -
How to change a Discussions post to a Question
I've opened two discussions recently but they really happen to be more like questions. They were both answered but both posts are still opened : http://www.seomoz.org/q/reading-suggestions-for-a-local-french-small-biz-website http://www.seomoz.org/q/should-i-block-wordpress-archive-and-tag How can I change them back to Question so I can mark them as close? Thanks 🙂
Moz Pro | | Akeif0 -
Crawl Diagnostics - Canonical Question
On one of my sites I have 61 notices for Rel Canonical. Is it bad to have these or is this just something that's informative?
Moz Pro | | kadesmith0 -
301 redirect
Guys Another post by me in regard to a 301 redirect which follows on from this post here http://www.seomoz.org/q/seomoz-crawl-test To quickly summarise all i have done is change URL name and done a simple 301 to change name where respective urls form old go to the relevant new pages Ok Now 14 weeks since we implemented our 301, Originally done In PHP everything looked text book but still 80% down on rankings PR has returned to inner pages Home page has not updated After some advice from some of the members here i changed the 301 on the old domain name from PHP to Htaccess This is the code i used on the old server is below RewriteEngine on RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.newsite.co.uk/$1 [R=301,L] On the new site the canonical is fixed by PHP , i want to change this to Htaccess, capturing the canonical element along with removing the trailing slash (This is only what has been done in the past so just keeping consistant) This is the situation Old site sits on a different server from the new so each have their own individual I.P addresses I am convinced somewhere in the PHP application we are chaining so want Htaccess on old server to do the 301 and want htaccess on new server to deal with canonical elements and remove trailing slash (if that best practice) What would be the best way to do this where we wont be chaining 301's at present all looks perfect and doing what it should, but i know there is an issue and i believe it to be with the php script Thanks for taking the time to look Paul Ps where i had the issue on the old site where Crawl test said page don't exist i now have on the new site if i try and crawl the non www. version of the new site , tested on a site that has the htaccess 301 in place and get the option of crawling the old or the new page so something don't stack up so its not the tool its the PHP Fetch as Googlebot and every other tool reports the correct header responses
Moz Pro | | kellymandingo0 -
Getting Redirect Loop and Oauth Error When Adding Facebook Page
Hi all, I keep getting the following error when trying to add my Facebook page. It worked fine in the past and has suddenly stopped working: The webpage at https://graph.facebook.com/oauth/authorize?client_id=142287725855094&redirect_uri=http%3A%2F%2Fpro.seomoz.org%2Fcampaigns%2F173488%2Fsocial%2Fcreate%2Ffacebook%2F127833296954.html&scope=read_stream%2Cuser_videos%2Cuser_photos%2Cuser_photo_video_tags%2Cmanage_pages%2Cread_insights has resulted in too many redirects. Clearing your cookies for this site or allowing third-party cookies may fix the problem. If not, it is possibly a server configuration issue and not a problem with your computer. I've tried clearing cache and deleting cookies. Any other ideas I would try? Thanks!
Moz Pro | | kenc1380 -
Way too many 301 redirects
Hi Guys Posting here again in regard to 301 redirects, SEOMOZ has just finished my second crawl, and its showing me nearly 4k 301 redirects, i am only tracking my new site which by the way changed domain name , however all im doing is tracking the new domain and there are no 301 implemented on that side (Except Canonical), so was wondering how SEOMoz is finding 4k of redirects. do you think it could be chaining somewhere ? as all the tests look good or could there be a problem with the reporting
Moz Pro | | kellymandingo0