Canonical Problem
-
Hello all.
Could someone have a look at my page here www.ashley-wedding-cars.co.uk here and tell me why I have a canonical problem.
-
It looks like you're 301-redirecting you're root site to the "/index.php" version of the page. The problem is that you're linking to the root "/" in the navigation and most of your inbound links are probably to the root. So, you're sending a mixed message about which version is actually canonical. I would stick to the root, personally.
The non-www vs. www issue is also in play, but I think it's a secondary problem.
-
Hi AshJez , I had visited your website. By observing the website I came to conclude that your website has canonical problem. Firstly I want to tell you about what is Canonical problem. Canonicalization is the process of picking the best url when there are several choices, and it usually refers to home pages. In brief it is www vs. non-www.
For more information please refer to this:
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/seo-advice-url-canonicalization/
-
I would just like to add that beside above problem, there is also an issue with trailing slashes
http://www.ashley-wedding-cars.co.uk//
http://www.ashley-wedding-cars.co.uk
Resolve to the same thing, You should add redirect from // version to non-slash version
Kind regards
Bojan
-
One problem is that the www and non-www versions of your domain resolve separately. As a best practice, you should pick one to be your primary domain and redirect the other to it. Otherwise, you can end up with duplicate content issues.
-
i can't see a probleem, why do you think you have one?
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
-
Advice needed on canonical paginated pages
Hi there. I use Genesis and StudioPress themes. I recently noticed that the canonical link for blog pages points to the first page on all paginated pages, which I understand is an SEO no-no. I found some code here that adds a unique canonical link to each paginated page but for categories only. It works fine. I only have one category for my site. My question is: is there a downside (or even upside) to not having a blog page and placing a link to my category page in the navigation bar instead, using the category page as the blog page? It looks good and works. What do you think? I find it odd that this seems to be an issue across the Internet and the only solution that comes up relies on the Yoast plugin, which I don't want to use (don't want to use a plugin for SEO). Thanks in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nobody16165422281340 -
Rel=Canonical Vs. 301 for blog articles
Over the last few years, my company has acquired numerous different companies -- some of which were acquired before that. Some of the products acquired were living on their previous company's parent site vs. having their own site dedicated to the product. The decision has been made that each product will have their own site moving forward. Since the product pages, blog articles and resource center landing pages (ex. whitepapers LPs) were living on the parent site, I'm struggling with the decision to 301 vs. rel=canonical those pages (with the new site being self canonicaled). I'm leaning toward take-down and 301 since rel=canonicals are simply suggestions to Google and a new domain can get all the help it can to start ranking. Are there any cons to doing so?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mfcb0 -
Self referencing canonicals and paginated content - advice needed
Hi, I help manage a large site that uses a lot of params for tracking, testing and to help deal with paginated content e.g. abc.com/productreview?page=2. The paginated review content correctly uses rel next and rel prev tags to ensure we get the value of all of the paginated review content that we have. The volume of param exclusions I need to maintain in Google & Bing Webmaster tools is getting clunky and frustrating. I would like to use self referencing canonicals, which would make life a lot easier. Here's my issue: If I use canonicals on the review pages the paginated content urls would also use the same canonical e.g. /productreview?page=2 pointing to /productreview I believe I am going to lose the value of those reviews, even though they use the rel next rel prev tags. BTW airbnb do this - do they know something I don't, don't care about the paginated reviews, or are they doing it incorrectly, see http://d.pr/i/14mPU Is my assertion above correct about losing the value of the paginated reviews if I use self referencing canonicals? Any thoughts on a solution to clearing up the param problem or do I have to live with it? Thanks in advance, Andy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AndyMacLean0 -
Travel site schema problems
I'm developing a travel site for my home state (Kansas - http://www.kansasisbeautiful.com though it's still has some development being worked on), but struggling to find scheme to work with for some items. So far my site is laid out by both region (northeast Kansas, western Kansas, etc.) and location types (waterfalls, parks, etc.). I'm currently working on coding in schema markup. I've found schema types for waterfalls, parks and landmarks, but I'm struggling to find anything for scenic drives (or highways, drives, anything related), hiking/biking trails and regions (northeast Kansas, southeast Kansas, etc.) The question I have is: What can I do to still try and put some kind of markup when there's nothing available that fits the item I'm trying to markup?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | msphoto0 -
Keyword rich internal linking - problem?
Had an interesting situation today.. We write daily news articles on our site. In each article we link out to two sources that we are writing about (credible sources) and we do one or two internal links. For example.. 'Today McDonald's have announced that they are purchasing more blue widgets in order to increase their opportunity to appeal to a larger market.' So in that sentence you can see one outbound link and one inbound to blue widgets on our site. I got an email today from a large company who we have written an article about in the industry and they have asked me to remove the link to their site.. I actually asked them why and this was their response. 'We're concerned because of the number of keyword-rich internal links in the article, and are worried that being included alongside them might be misinterpreted by Google as an artificial link.' Fristly, do they really have anything to be worried about?.. but more importantly, with our internal linking, do we have anything to be worried about?.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nick-name1230 -
Canonical Rel .uk and .au to .com site?
Hi guys, we have a client whose main site is .com but who has a .co.uk and a com.au site promoting the same company/brand. Each site is verified locally with a local address and phone but when we create content for the sites that is universal, should I rel=canonical those pages on the .co.uk and .com.au sites to the .com site? I saw a post from Dr. Pete that suggests I should as he outlines pretty closely the situation we're in: "The ideal use of cross-domain rel=canonical would be a situation where multiple sites owned by the same entity share content, and that content is useful to the users of each individual site." Thanks in advance for your insight!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | wcbuckner0 -
Canonical Tag for Pages with Less Content
I am considering using a cross-domain canonical tag for pages that are very similar but one has less content than the other. The domains are geo specific, so for example. www.page.com - with content xxx, yyy, zzz, and www.page.fr with content xxx is this a problem because while there is clearly duplicate content here the pages are not actually significantly similar since there is so much less content on one page than the other?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | theLotter0 -
I had most of my sites down for a month for technical problems, how do I recover my SEO status ?
I had most of my sites down for a month for technical problems, how do I recover my SEO status ? I did everything possible to not get offline, but I did, some months before my domais were extremely slow, leading to failures over failures. I got them down and moved to another host. What should I do in SEO know that the mess is done ?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | aamato0