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
-
How crucial are H1 tags and descriptions in wordpress categories?
Hi all Trying to improve SEO for my (mostly) local site, www.nectarbridge.com, and recently got back on Moz Pro account. First crawl of my site by Moz, a manageable number of issues that I've mostly sorted, but the category with the largest number of problems is missing or invalid tags. My content pages and blog posts are not missing the tags. It's category, archives, etc., including multiple pages, ex: https://www.nectarbridge.com/category/blog/page/4/ A smaller number of pages are being flagged by Moz as missing descriptions, and they are also category pages and the like. So the question is - how hard should I pursue fixing these issues? I'm using the divi theme, which apparently doesn't display the category description by default (if it did, that would kill two birds with one stone). There is a fix to add the category description, but before I get into that I'm trying to discern whether this issue really matters greatly to SEO or if I should spend that time just working on more content.
Moz Pro | | gary_nectarbridge0 -
Source page showsI have 2 h1 tags on my page. I can only find one.
When I grade my page it says I have more than one h1 tag. I view the source page and it shows there are two h1 headings with the same wording. If I delete the one h1 heading I can find, the page source shows I have deleted both of them. I don't know how to get to the other heading to delete it. And I'm off page one of google! Can anybody help? Clay Stephens
Moz Pro | | Coot0 -
My "tag" pages are showing up as duplicate content. Is this harmful?
Hi. I ran a Moz sitecrawl. I see "Yes" under "Duplicate Page Content" for each of my tag pages. Is this harmful? If so, how do I fix it? This is a Wordpress site. Tags are used in both the blog and ecommerce sections of the site. Ecommerce is a very small portion. Thank you. | |
Moz Pro | | dlmilli1 -
How to find missing or incorrect title tags with a site hosting lots of pages.
i have a website that features more than 9,000 pages. i'm trying to figure out which ones have missing or incorrect title tags. Should I start with screaming frog??
Moz Pro | | SapphireCo0 -
Meta Tag Descriptions not being found in Moz Crawls
Hey guys, I have been managing a few websites and have input them into Moz for crawl reports, etc. For a while I have noticed that we were getting a gratuitous amount of errors when it came to the number of missing meta tags. It was numbering in the 200's. The sites were in place before I got here and a lot of the older posts no one had even attempted to include tags, links of the page or anything. As they are all Wordpress Sites and they all already had the Yoast/Wordpress SEO plug-in installed on them, I decided I would go through each post and media file one at a time and update their meta tags via the plug in. I personally did this so I know that I added and saved each one, however the Moz crawl reports continue to show that we are missing roughly 200 meta tags. I've seen a huge drop off in 404 errors and stuff since I went through and double checked everything on the sites, however the meta tag errors persist. Is this the case that Moz is not recognizing the tags when it crawls because I used the Yoast Plugin? Or would you say that the plugin is the issue and I should find another way to add meta tags to the pages and posts on the site? My main concern is that if Moz is having issues crawling the sites, is Google also seeing the same thing? The URLS include:
Moz Pro | | MOZ.info
sundancevacationsblog.com
sundancevacationsnews.com
sundancevacationscharities.com Any help would be appreciated!0 -
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 -
301 or canonical for multiple homepage versions?
I used 301 redirects to point several versions of the homepage to www.site.com. i was just rereading moz's beginners guide to seo, and it uses that scenario as an example for rel canonical, not 301 redirects. Which is better? My understanding is that 301s remove all doubt of getting links to the wrong version and diluting link equity.
Moz Pro | | kimmiedawn0 -
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