Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
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
-
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 -
A question on keywords that rank 51+
Good afternoon everyone. I wanted to pose a question to the group about keywords and the "on-page optimization - grade a page tool." I have a list of keywords that I am trying to rank for. Some of them are not ranked in the top 50, so on the keyword ranking tool it gives you the 51+ message in the rank column. For the items that are ranked I can try to improve them by looking at grade a page and typing in the URL and keyword. It will then give me a score and suggestions on how to improve it. With that being said, is there an easy way to find out which pages I should be optimizing those keywords which rank at 51+ for, besides typing the keywords in Google and seeing what URL it associates with the specific keyword? I hope the question above is clear.
Moz Pro | | trumpfinc0 -
Canonical URLs all show trailing slash on main site pages - using Yoast SEO for Wordpress - how to correct
We are using Yoast for a number of our sites. We use naked domain as the canonical. I have noticed in the header tags that all our sites show the canonical URLs as having a trailing slash: Example: http;//foxspizzajc.com, when I look at the source code, it shows the canonical as http;//foxspizzajc.com/ Of course, it is much more likely that all sites that link to us will not use the trailing slash - so preferably we do not want that to be the canonical - among other reasons. Does this need to be fixed so the trailing slash is removed? I cannot see how to do this in Yoast SEO or in Permalinks structure for Wordpress. Sorry for my ignorance. Thanks for any help.
Moz Pro | | Adam_RushHour_Marketing1 -
Add to cart redirect using 302
I am getting a list of crawl errors in Moz because I am using a 302 redirect when people click on an item using the quickview add to cart eg:http://copyfaxes.com/cart/quickadd?partno=4061 will redirect them to the viewshoppingcart page. Is this wrong should this be a 301 redirect? There is no link juice to pass. Thanks
Moz Pro | | copyfaxes10 -
Need help understanding search filter URL's and meta tags
Good afternoon Mozzers, One of our clients is a real estate agent and on that site there is a search field that will allow a person to search by filtered categories. Currently, the URL structure makes a new URL for each filter option and in my Moz reports I get the report that there is missing meta data. However, the page is the same the filter options are different so I am at a loss as to how to proper tag our site to optimize those URL's. Can I rel canonical the URL's or alt rel them? I have been looking for a solution for a few days now and like I said I am at a loss of how to properly resolve these warning messages, or if I should even be concerned with the warning messages from Moz (obviously I should be concerned, they are warning messages for a reason). Thank you for your assistance in advance!
Moz Pro | | Highline_Ideas0 -
404 even after Successful 301 Redirection
Hi, I've got quite few 404 error links on my site and I manually redirected all of them one by one with 301. They are redirecting successfully. But when I check my MOZ analysis, it still shows me as 404 error. I've done this about 4 days ago and MOZ crawled to my site couple times after that if it's not everyday. Do you know what the issue could be? And how can I fix it? PS: I've used Wordpress Redirection tool for it first and redirection did not work. Then I had to install the Simple 301 Redirects plugin to get it done.
Moz Pro | | nunobaronio0 -
In alt tag of a image can we use #hashtag or domain.com ? Is that good SEO or not allowed ?
Some of the Google Search shows a title has a hashtag of an article, which contain keyword and while tweeting them, the title which has a hashtag automatically very good used for getting traffic to the blog. And other one, can we use the hash tag inside the alt attribute ? Or our domain name with .com in it. Like Google.com or #Google ?
Moz Pro | | Esaky0 -
HTC access 301 redirect rules regarding pagination and striped category base (wp)
I am an admin of a wordpress.org blog and I used to use "Yoast All in one SEO" plugin. While I was using this plugin it stripped the category base from my blog post URL's. With yoast all in one seo: Site.com/topic/subtpoic/page/#
Moz Pro | | notgwenevere
Without yoast all in one seo: Site.com/category/topic/subtopic/page/# Now, that I have switched to another plugin, I am trying to manage the page crawl errors which are tremendous somewhere around 1800, mostly due to pagination. Rather than redirecting each URL individually I would like to develop HTC access 301 redirects rules. However all instructions on how to create these HTC access 301 redirect rules are regarding the suffix rather than the category base. So my question is, can HTC access 301 redirects rules work to fix this problem? Including pagination? And if so, what would this particular HTC access 301 redirect look like? Especially regarding pagination? And do I really have to write a 301 redirect for each pagination page?0