Implementing rel=canonical in a CMS
-
Hi Guys,
We have an issue with duplicate content caused by dynamic URLs, so want to implement rel=canonical. However this isn't easy due to the way out CMS works.
These were pulled from SEOMoz scan:
http://www.transair.co.uk/pp+Aerobatics-Training+463
http://www.transair.co.uk/pp+Aerobatics-Training+463?page=1&perpage=10&sales_group=NULL&filter_colour=&filter_size=&sortby=RELEV&inStock=NO&resfilter=
and are obviously the same page. As far as I can see I have two options.1. To implement the canonical meta tag only on page 1.
2. To implement the canonical tag so that I add ?page=X
so
http://www.transair.co.uk/pp+Aerobatics-Training+463
would be
http://www.transair.co.uk/pp+Aerobatics-Training+463?page=1Will this work?
Thanks
Rob
-
Ideally, you'd fix the crawl path, but that may be tricky (unless they've patched the CMS). You could add the canonical to just the "page=1" version, but admittedly that's a bit code-intensive.
An alternate idea - that is fairly Google-friendly. You could add a "View All" version and then point the canonical on all search pages to that version. Especially since all is only 2 pages, that could work well in your case and you wouldn't have to worry about all the variants or search results not getting crawled.
-
Still I would advice to talk to Sanderson first, because maybe they have met the same issue on several clients.And have developed something to resolve it.
Webmaster tools can be helpful too just as Bede said.
-
Hi Istvan,
Thanks for your comments. I have contacted Sanderson but as @Bede suggests, I might try and do this in webmaster tools
-
Hi Bede,
I did think about that a while back, the issue is that we are an ecommerce site, so I don't want to run the risk of excluding page 2,3,4 etc from being crawled. However, I think you might be right - this may have to be the way forward. Currently we have 3165 products and 9495 pages of duplicate content, so it is something I need to get fixed.
Thanks, Rob
-
Just throwing this out there, but, could rel=canonical be augmented or assisted in this case by URL parameters in webmaster tools?
https://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1235687
-
@Nicolai: maybe this could be a solution: http://drupal.org/project/nodewords
@Rob: I am searching for a solution. Did you try contacting http://www.sanderson.com regarding this issue?
-
Hi Istvan,
Thank you very much - take your time It's deeply appreciated.
-
Hi Nicolai,
More than possible in the evening I will have more time to check things. I will look for both Drupal and Elucid solutions.
Gr.,
Istvan
-
Hi Rob / Istvan,
@ Rob, I hope you don't mind that I "steal" your thread, that's not my intention. I have what seems to be the exact same problem as you (as described in this threat), and I can't seem to find a solution for it.
@Istvan - my CMS is Drupal, and I guess I have the exact same problem as Rob(?).
Again guys: Apologies for staling this thread, I hope it's ok. I just saw it and was very happy to find not only the question written by Rob, but also someone who seems to have an idea of what to do about it.
Thanks in advance, and good day both of you.
Nicolai
-
Hi Rob,
I will check and get back to you in a few hours.
Hopefully we'll find something for you
Gr.,
Istvan
-
Hi Istvan,
It is a system called Elucid from Sanderson. It is basically a multi-channel platform. The problem content all run off the same template, which is the issue.
Thanks
-
Hi Rob,
What CMS are you using? Maybe we could link a few very good plugins which will help you out with this situation.
Gr.,
Istvan
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
-
Unsolved Moz is showing a canonical error that dont belong.
Hi guys, and thanks for this excellent source of information. i have an issue with the moz system because is telling to me that i dont have canonical instructions but i have canonical instructions on all my pages, so... im confused because maybe im not understanding what the system want to show to me. if you can help me i will be very gratefull. here you can see a page that have the canonical instruction. https://drive.google.com/file/d/14U_-Sgu_NQaB7kMBH3AguHQMHyHX9L8X/view?usp=sharing and here you can see what is reporting to me the MOZ system. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pqgSC-V9WOyBPvQEr06pbqpLf_w7-q8J/view?usp=sharing this is happening on 19 pages, and all the 19 pages have the canonical instruction.
On-Page Optimization | | b-lab
thanks in advance guys.0 -
Is there a limit to the number of duplicate pages pointing to a rel='canonical ' primary?
We have a situation on twiends where a number of our 'dead' user pages have generated links for us over the years. Our options are to 404 them, 301 them to the home page, or just serve back the home page with a canonical tag. We've been 404'ing them for years, but i understand that we lose all the link juice from doing this. Correct me if I'm wrong? Our next plan would be to 301 them to the home page. Probably the best solution but our concern is if a user page is only temporarily down (under review, etc) it could be permanently removed from the index, or at least cached for a very long time. A final plan is to just serve back the home page on the old URL, with a canonical tag pointing to the home page URL. This is quick, retains most of the link juice, and allows the URL to become active again in future. The problem is that there could be 100,000's of these. Q1) Is it a problem to have 100,000 URLs pointing to a primary with a rel=canonical tag? (Problem for Google?) Q2) How long does it take a canonical duplicate page to become unique in the index again if the tag is removed? Will google recrawl it and add it back into the index? Do we need to use WMT to speed this process up? Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | dsumter0 -
Rel canonical tag back to the same page the tag is on?
Very simple, Why would a website (and I have seen tons doing this) link the rel canonical tag back to the same page the tag is on? Example: somepage.htm has a canonical tag linking to somepage.htm I thought the idea of this tag was to tell google if 2 pages are similar, this page is the original, and it's this page which should be indexed and the page with the tag on should pass all PR to the original. Maybe im wrong and someone can help me out to understand this.
On-Page Optimization | | activitysuper0 -
Is reported duplication on the pages or their canonical pages?
There are several sections getting flagged for duplication on one of our sites: http://mysite.com/section-1/?something=X&confirmed=true
On-Page Optimization | | Safelincs
http://mysite.com/section-2/?something=X&confirmed=true
http://mysite.com/section-3/?something=X&confirmed=true Each of the above are showing as having duplicates of the other sections. Indeed, these pages are exactly the same (it's just an SMS confirmation page you enter your code in), however, they all have canonical links back to the section (without the query string), i.e. section-1, section-2 and section-3 respectively. These three sections have unique content and aren't flagged up for duplications themselves, so my questions are: Are the pages with the query strings the duplicates, and if so why are the canonical links being ignored? or Are the canonical pages without the query strings the duplicates, and if so why don't they appear as URLs in their own right in the duplicate content report? I am guessing it's the former, but I can't figure out why it would ignore the canonical links. Any ideas? Thanks0 -
Dealing with thin content/95% duplicate content - canonical vs 301 vs noindex
My client's got 14 physical locations around the country but has a webpage for each "service area" they operate in. They have a Croydon location. But a separate page for London, Croydon, Essex, Luton, Stevenage and many other places (areas near Croydon) that the Croydon location serves. Each of these pages is a near duplicate of the Croydon page with the word Croydon swapped for the area. I'm told this was a SEO tactic circa 2001. Obviously this is an issue. So the question - should I 301 redirect each of the links to the Croydon page? Or (what I believe to be the best answer) set a rel=canonical tag on the duplicate pages). Creating "real and meaningful content" on each page isn't quite an option, sorry!
On-Page Optimization | | JamesFx0 -
Add Rel Canonical to all pages on my site (Magento)
Can anyone guide me as to how to add the REL CANONICAL feature to every page on my website (Magento shopping cart) Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | lacx.com0 -
How to solve Rel Canonical issue?
I have created one campaign for my website on SEOmoz. I found Rel Canonical issue for following 2 URLs. I can not understand that, what is error with that? Can any one help me to solve it? http://vistastores.com/blog/?p=1 http://vistastores.com/blog/?page_id=2
On-Page Optimization | | CommercePundit0 -
Correct use of Canonical link vs 301 redirect
Hi All, Seeking yet more advice. SEOMOZ tools have told me I have duplicate content on one of my sites and I am keen to clean this up. I am not to familiar with the following so thought I would ask. The duplicate content is shown on : www.mysite.com www.mysite.com/index.html Obviously I only see index.html when I check the code so what is the best method of resolving the duplicate content, Canonical or 301? Can you give me an example 🙂 Thanks all
On-Page Optimization | | wedmonds0