Which pages should use rel="canonical" links?
-
I have many pages showing up as multiple content. Most of the them belong to product pages for my store, login pages that show up everywhere on the site, etc. I know that I need to use the rel=canonical link in the header but after searching the forum I'm still unsure of what pages need it. Is it the pages that I don't want searched/crawled by Google or the other way around?
Thanks!
Crystal
-
Google will still crawl canonical pages. How soon the index will reflect that will depend on how fast that crawl happens. I'm not sure there's anything you can do to speed that up.
-
Yes, you're right -- they are notices, not warnings. Thanks for the response.
Do you have an answer for my #2 question?
-
You shouldn't be getting warnings. They appear as notices in my campaign and they're there to let you know that the spider found them. The reason you need to know is that canonical has a downside: crawl budget.
Bots still have to crawl your canonical pages. If you add content on a frequent basis, this could impact how quickly that content gets indexed. It's always better to have fewer pages but, when you can't avoid it, there's canonical. That's why SEOMOZ tracks it for you.
-
Follow-up questions:
[1] My site development tool (XSP) has recently added the canonical reference as an auto-generated line of code, every page of my site now has it. Why is SEOmoz warning me that I have hundreds of pages of canonicals if it's supposed to be a GOOD thing?
[2] Google is still seeing the pages without the canonical tag because that's how they were indexed. Will they eventually get purged from their index, or should I be proactive about that, and if so, how?
Thanks for any input.
-
Perfect, thank you! This will be my homework for the evening.
Crystal
-
If you have duplicate content, Google only wants to keep one in their index. It used to be that Google would just pick one but, with canonical, you can pick. Pick what page you want indexed and then put a canonical with the URL of the page you want to keep on the other pages. Google will then keep the page you wanted and ignore the rest.
A visual guide here
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
-
Canonicals
I dynamically generated pages using rewrite functions in wordpress (new-york, san-diego, san-francisco). All these pages look the same but with different content. yoast (seo wordpress plugin) was unaware of this and set canonicals up relating to the wordpress page used as the template page for the dynamic pages (City_home_page). so all these pages had the canonical https://dinnerdancecruises.com/City_Home_Page. using search console, i saw google indexed my site, looked at all these dynamically created pages (which is about 30 pages) and took them all in as duplicate pages. this happen sometime in april or may. I fixed this problem and set unique canonicals up for each dynamically created page. but now google is not crawling them for some reason. im not sure why its been months and these pages are not indexed. i thought to myself is it because these links end up on multiple pages? sort of like having "terms of agreement" link at the footer. every single page has that terms of agreement link. does google look at those links as duplicates and not index the page at all. this is where my issue lies. i need google to crawl regularly and see those pages with their new, unique canonicals and re-index them correctly. but it seems to save cpu resources, google feels once a thief always a thief. i could be wrong but this is why i need your suggestion. thank you.
On-Page Optimization | | bobperez7360950 -
Product Page Links
I have a product category page at https://www.hurtlegear.com.au/s1000rr/ which currently has 38 products on it. Problem is, all the product titles start with the name of the text: "bmw s1000rr" (because that's what they are) - so that means there are 38 anchored internal links on that page, all starting with the same keyword. You can see how that might look to the Google crawler. Recently that page dropped from around 15 to outside the top 100, and Moz tells me that the page is keyword stuffed with "bmw s1000rr" (no suprise) so I'm guessing that may be the reason the page has disappeared out of the SERPs. I don't really want to change all the product titles (then they wouldn't make sense) so I'm just wondering if there is any way around this? Is there some way of telling Google that this is a product category page and therefore to ignore the anchor text in all of those product links? Can/should the links have some kind of markup on them? Or is the page beyond help? Basically I'm looking at a way of keeping the product titles as they are, but avoiding a page penalty from Google somehow. I'm a bit of a newbie, any suggestions would be most appreciated. Cheers, Graeme
On-Page Optimization | | graeme720 -
Proper Use and Interpretation of new Query/Page report
When I'm in WMT/Search Console - I start a process of looking at all of the data initially unfiltered Then I select a query. Let's say its a top query for starters and I filter my results by that top query (exactly) With the filter on, I flip over to Pages and I get about a dozen results. When I look at this list, I get the normal variety of output: impressions, clicks, CTR, avg. position One thing that seems a bit odd to me is that most of the average positions for each of the URLs displayed is about the same. Say they range from 1.0 to 1.3. Does this mean that Google is displaying the dozen or so URLs to different people and generally in the 1st or 2nd position. Does this mean that my dozen or so pages are all competing with each other for the same query? On one hand, if all of my dozen pages displayed most of the time in the SERP all at the same time, I would see this as a good thing in that I would be 'owning' the SERP for my particular query. On the other hand, I'm concerned that the keyword I'm trying to optimize a particular page for is being partially distributed to less optimized pages. The main target page is shown the most (good) and it has about a 15x better CTR (also good). But all together, the other 11 pages are taking in around 40% of impressions and get a far lower CTR (bad). Am I interpreting this data correctly? Is WMT showing me what pages a particular query sends traffic to? Is there any way to extract the keywords that a particular page receives? When I reset my query and then start by selecting a specific page (exact match) and then select queries - is this showing my the search queries that drove traffic to that page? Is there a 'best practices' process to try to target a keyword to a specific page so that it gets more than the 60% of impressions I'm seeing now? Obviously I don't want to do a canonical because each keyword goes to many different pages and each page receives a different mix of keywords. I would think there would be a different technique when your page has an average position off of page 1.
On-Page Optimization | | ExploreConsulting0 -
"og:description" vs. name="description"
According to Rock Your SEO with Structured Social Sharing "OG description overrides meta description tag." Moz Crawl Diagnostics seems to ignore og:description and only look for meta name="description" - does that mean my meta descriptions tags should be meta name?
On-Page Optimization | | leighw0 -
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 -
Internal Followed Links and Total Internal Links as 1
It is showing Internal Followed Links and Total Internal Links as 1 in OpenSiteExplorer Tool http://www.expresscasket.com/ http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/comparisons?site=www.expresscasket.com Not able to understand and identify the problem and fix it. But when i check in google webmasters tool, it is showing lots of internal links. Does it differ those internal links and your trace of internal links
On-Page Optimization | | expresscasket0 -
Too many On-Page Links warning + Javascript Menu
We do have javascript menus on each page. These are used by a visitor to contact a specific office in a specif city. Could this be where all these links are being counted? I don't see them elsewhere? What about links that are in the footer? They actually link to the same pages as the menus, but are just straight links.
On-Page Optimization | | Stevej240 -
Do we need to use the canonical tag on non-indexed pages?
Hi there I have been working in / learning SEO for just over a year, coming from a non dev background, so there are still plenty of the finer points on-page points I am working on. Slowly building up confidence and knowledge with the great SEOMoz as a reference! We are working on this site http://www.preciseuk.co.uk (we are still tweaking the tags and content by the way- not finished yet!) Because a lot of the information is within accordians, a page is generated for each tab of the accordian expanded, for example: http://www.preciseuk.co.uk/facilities-management.php is the main page but then you also have: http://www.preciseuk.co.uk/facilities-management.php?tab=0 http://www.preciseuk.co.uk/facilities-management.php?tab=1 http://www.preciseuk.co.uk/facilities-management.php?tab=2 http://www.preciseuk.co.uk/facilities-management.php?tab=3 http://www.preciseuk.co.uk/facilities-management.php?tab=4 http://www.preciseuk.co.uk/facilities-management.php?tab=5 All of which are in the same file. According to the crawl test, these pages are not indexed. Because it is all in one file, should we add the canonical tag to it, so that this is replicated in all the tab pages that are generated? eg. Thanks in advance for your help! Liz OneResult
On-Page Optimization | | oneresult
liz@oneresult.co.uk2