Will rel=canonical cause a page to be indexed?
-
Say I have 2 pages with duplicate content:
One of them is: http://www.originalsite.com/originalpage
This page is the one I want to be indexed on google (domain rank already built, etc.)
http://www.originalpage.com is more of an ease of use domain, primarily for printed material. If both of these sites are identical, will rel=canonical pointing to "http://www.originalsite.com/originalpage" cause it to be indexed? I do not plan on having any links on my site going to "http://www.originalsite.com/originalpage", they would instead go to "http://www.originalpage.com".
-
Read your additional comment (to @Highland). If you canonical from a known page (indexed and linked to, internally and/or externally) to an unknown page with no links, it would act a bit like a 301-redirect, in theory. The target page (of the canonical) would start ranking as if it were the source page.
The problem is that that page isn't really canonical. You have a tag saying "This is the page" but every single other cue (internal links, inbound links, etc.) says that the non-canonical page is really canonical. In other words, your canonical tag says the opposite of everything else you're saying. That's generally not a good situation. If you want a page to be canonical, treat it that way. Sending Google mixed signals can get messy fast.
-
Why would you point rel canonical to a page you don't want to rank?
-
I probably phrased poorly...simpler question: If there is a page that nobody knows about, it hasn't been submitted, there are no links to it...the only way the outside world would ever know it exists is if they looked at a rel="canonical" tag...will google follow that canonical tag and index it?
-
I actually have a completely different experience. Within the same domain, not between 2 domains. Lets say my page is http://www.originalsite.com/originalpage-1.html http://www.originalsite.com/originalpage-2.html http://www.originalsite.com/originalpage-3.html Each of them is actually http://www.originalsite.com/originalpage.html So each of the above pages (all 4) contain a canonical tag to the original page http://www.originalsite.com/originalpage.html What happens is when I check in the SERPS, nothing except http://www.originalsite.com/originalpage.html show up doing site: checks. However, if I do a cache: for any of the 4 pages, the http://www.originalsite.com/originalpage.html shows up. So Google identifies each of the URLs, but only returns http://www.originalsite.com/originalpage.html in my case.
-
Canonical doesn't prevent a page from being indexed. Canonical allows you, the end user, to specify which of your duplicate pages to treat as the real page. Otherwise Google will pick one. The page still is in the index and is still crawled, it's just ignored for ranking purposes.
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
-
Should summary pages have the rel canonical set to the full article?
My site has tons of summary pages, Whether for a PDF download, a landing page or for an article. There is a summary page, that explains the asset and contains a link to the actual asset. My question is that if the summary page is just summary of an article with a "click here to read full article" button, Should I set the rel canonical on the summary page to go to the full article? Thanks,
Technical SEO | | Autoboof0 -
Indexing pages content that is not needed
Hi All, I have a site that has articles and a side block that shows interesting articles in a column block. While we google for a keyword i can see the page but the meta description is picked from the side block "interesting articles" and not the actual article in the page. How can i deny indexing that block alone Thanks
Technical SEO | | jomin740 -
Duplicated rel=author tags (x 3) on WordPress pages, any issue with this?
Hi,
Technical SEO | | jeffwhitfield
We seem to have duplicated rel=author tags (x 3) on WordPress pages, as we are using Yoast WordPress SEO plugin which adds a rel=author tag into the head of the page and Fancier Author Box plugin which seems to add a further two rel=author tags toward the bottom of the page. I checked the settings for Fancier Author Box and there doesn't seem to be the option to turn rel=author tags off; we need to keep this plugin enabled as we want the two tab functionality of the author bio and latest posts. All three rel=author tags seem to be correctly formatted and Google Structured Data Testing Tool shows that all authorship rel=author markup is correct; is there any issue with having these duplicated rel=author tags on the WordPress pages?
I tried searching the Q&A but couldn't find anything similar enough to what I'm asking above. Many thanks in advance and kind regards.0 -
Can I canonical the same page?
I have a site where I have 500+ Page listing pages and I would like to rel=canonical them to the master page. Example: http://www.example.com//articles?p=18 OR http://www.example.com/articles?p=65 I plan on adding this to the section from of the page template so it goes to all pages - When I do this, I will also add the canonical to the page I am directing the canonical. Is this a bad thing? Or allowed?
Technical SEO | | JoshKimber0 -
If the order of products on a page changes each time the page is loaded, does this have a negative effect on the SEO of those pages?
Hello, a client of mine has a number of category pages that each have a list of products. Each time the page is reloaded the order of those products changes. Does this have a negative effect on the pages' rankings? Thank you
Technical SEO | | Kerry_Jones2 -
Rel canonical for partner sites - product pages only or also homepage and other key pages?
Hello there Our main site is www.arenaflowers.com. We also run a number of partner sites (eg: http://flowershop.cancerresearchuk.org/). We've relcanonical'd the products on the partner site back to the main (arenaflowers.com) site. eg: http://flowershop.cancerresearchuk.org/flowers/tutti_frutti_es_2013 rel canonicals back to: http://www.arenaflowers.com/flowers/tutti_frutti_es_2013). My question: Should we also relcanonical the homepage and other key pages on partner sites back to the main arenaflowers website too? The content is similar but not identical. We don't want our partner sites to be outranking the original (as is the case on kw flower delivery for example). (NB this situation may be complicated by the fact we appear to have an unnatural link penalty on af.com (and when we did an upgrade a while back, the af.com site fell out of the index altogether due to some issues with our move to AWS.) We're getting professional SEO advice on this but wondered what the Moz community's thoughts were.. Cheers, Will
Technical SEO | | ArenaFlowers.com0 -
Will updating part of my site help a static web page
Hi, what i am trying to find out is, i have a page on my site http://www.clairehegarty.co.uk/virtual-gastric-band-with-hypnotherapy and i would like to know, once i have got the page to the way i want it, the page will not change, so i would like to know if i update my site and add pages and articles, will the updates help this page with google rankings, or do i have to keep updating this page if i want it to rank high with google. i have seen pages that have never changed but they continue to rank high with google and i would like to know their secret
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-1848860 -
301s vs. rel=canonical for duplicate content across domains
Howdy mozzers, I just took on a telecommunications client who has spent the last few years acquiring smaller communications companies. When they took over these companies, they simply duplicated their site at all the old domains, resulting in a bunch of sites across the web with the exact same content. Obviously I'd like them all 301'd to their main site, but I'm getting push back. Am I OK to simply plug in rel=canonical tags across the duplicate sites? All the content is literally exactly the same. Thanks as always
Technical SEO | | jamesm5i0