Many canonical warnings. Is this a problem?
-
My site has over 80 canonical warnings. The report states the url is for example http://www.musicliveuk.com and the 'tag value' column says http://www.musicliveuk.com/ Is that a good thing? I'm new to seo and am running my site on wordpress with all in one seo pack. Does this mean the seo pack has automatically added canonical tags to my pages? If so why is it showing as an error? I am also getting lots of 301 permanent redirects and I haven't set any up manually. I'm getting them for every page on my site from the normal url to a url with a slash at the end.
-
Pleasure
-
Indeed I did have two plugins running... DOH!
Thanks guys.
-
Do you have multiple SEO plugins running? Maybe the template has canonical settings out the box?
See lines 65 & 82on the home page.. there are 2.. I'm leaning towards template if I had to guess
-
Thanks guys. I also get warnings that some pages have more than one canonical tag. I don't add any manually and just use the all in one seo pack settings. How can this be and how do I fix it?
-
Agree with Vahe. Also, warnings are not necessarily errors but meant to raise flags for you to check the site to see if everything is meant to be there.
An incorrect rollout of canonicals (e.g. if every page on your site has the home page as the canonical) can result in a lot of pages being removed out of the index.
Regarding the 301s, check all pages for links to other internal pages & look at any links that have a trailing slash at the end and change to remove the trailing slash, e.g. these are 2 different URLs:
- http://www.musicliveuk.com/category/planning-events
- http://www.musicliveuk.com/category/planning-events/
Yet "/category/planning-events/" 301s to "/category/planning-events"
The non www version 301s to the www version too.. so check if there are any internal links to:
and change to:
-
There's nothing wrong. The wordpress SEO pack is actually doing the right thing to ensure search engines like Google see only one version (and the right version) of your website, this being with the www. with the /.
If your site didn't do what you had mentioned above, search engines would have indexed (listed) what they thought was the right version. There are also other several disadvantages to this:
(1) The page rank (domain authority) would be split between the www and non www versions of the site. Some would go even further and say that it would cause site duplication, which is not favoured by search engines.
(2) People linking to your site would not link to one URL version. Again this would cause spreading the link juice.
Since there are the proper 301 redirects on your site, no matter which version people link to, it will go back to the www version with the /. Just make sure that in Bing and Google Webmaster tools you also change your preferred domain settings to the www version.
Hope this helps,
Vahe
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
-
301 to canonical
I'm doing some work on a website, they have a very popular product search where you enter a specific part code (6 digits) and it takes you to the product. So for example Search: 123456 Page redirected to domain.com/product/123456 With a canonical of domain.com/product/this-is-the-product-title Would it be beneficial to redirect from /product/123456 to /product/this-is-the-product-title Google seems to be indexing both versions. For some of these products a reasonable amount of links are built.
On-Page Optimization | | ThomasHarvey0 -
Ranking problem.
Hello, Using Moz I can see that my ranks for my site ZenPlugs.com for keywords such as 'ear plugs' and 'molded ear plugs' and several other keywords aren't as high as other sites with similar DAs. I can't see why, am I missing something? Many thanks, Toby
On-Page Optimization | | T0BY0 -
How many Anchor text i can make on One page.
I would like to have clear answer in numbers i.e. 1, 2, 3, or 4 etc. of how many Anchor text i can make on One page.????
On-Page Optimization | | 1akal0 -
Can someone help with Canonical?
I have a wordpress site that On-Page Grader is saying I don't have Canonical done correctly. Here is the comment. Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical If the canonical tag is pointing to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. Make sure you're targeting the right page (if this isn't it, you can reset the target above) and then change the canonical tag to reference that URL. Recommendation: We check to make sure that IF you use canonical URL tags, it points to the right page. If the canonical tag points to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. If you've not made this page the rel=canonical target, change the reference to this URL. NOTE: For pages not employing canonical URL tags, this factor does not apply. I have quite a few sites and have never had an issue with this. Can anyone help? I tried installing a plugin but that seems to have made it worse. This is the front page of the site btw.
On-Page Optimization | | jonnyholt1 -
Is it better to put all your CSS in 1 file or is it no problem to use 10 files or more like on most frameworks?
Is it better to put all your CSS in 1 file or is it no problem to use 10 files or more like on most frameworks?
On-Page Optimization | | conversal0 -
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 -
Too many links on a page?
On my blog posts, I have links to all the categories and months, dating back 5-6 years. This make the number of links on each blog page well over 100, which I understand might decrease the value of each page. Is there a problem with having more than 100 links on a page?
On-Page Optimization | | rdreich492 -
Confirmation regarding canonical and syndication google tags
Hi, We are in the process of improving our CMS upstream to resolve our duplicate content issues. We were hit pretty hard by the Panda update. One of the steps we have taken is implementation of the canonical link tag across all domains in our site. You see, we are a news release service with muliple channels and websites to represent each. The problem is that a client will submit a release and in many cases the news item is relevant to multiple channels I.E. multiple websites under the same IP range. Site Examples:
On-Page Optimization | | jarrett.mackay
www.hotelnewsresource.com www.restaurantnewsresource.com
www.travelindustrywire.com From a user perspective, it makes sense that they should be able to access the article from the site they are browsing without being redirected to the site we feel carries the most relevance. We hope the canconical tag will resolve this issue for us. I have also read about the syndication tag and was looking for feedback or recommendations if we should implement that also, but it may be overkill as the two tags objectives seem to be similar. I guess my first question is if the syndication tag is only used by Google News. Secondly, and a little off topic is that we also offer an API and like many other sites, I have read, our content partners are now doing better in primary and long tail rankings even thought we are the original source. My assumption is that we should modify the API to force using both caconical and syndication tags as well. Lastly, I´m curious if anyone has tested the original source tag and if we should implement that as well. Thanks everyone. Jarrett0