Issue: Rel Canonical
-
seomoz give me notices about rel canonical issues, how can i resolve it. any one can help me, what is rel canonical and how can i remove it
-
I use the Yoast Pluggin to place the same url on advanced options has de canonical url in order to remove the notice of seomoz
-
thanks
-
Hi Iqbal,
I have checked all URLs that you have shared. You have implemented canonical tag perfectly on above all URLs. SEOmoz just provide notice whenever they find canonical tag in page so that you have verify it out. I have verified all your pages, you don't have any error its just alert from seomoz.
-
It's important to simply be aware of the Moz results, you do not need to "fix" every issues or "error".
-
Hi Iqbal,
Seomoz has just alert you about canonical tag it might not be a error. Can you share your website URL here or PM for checking error ?
-
You do not need to remove it. You need to check whether or not it has been implemented correctly. Check this - http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=139394
If you need further help, please let me know.
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
-
Is there a way to rel = canonical only part of a page?
Hi guys: I'm doing SEO for a boat accessories store, and for instance they have marine AC systems, many of them, and while the part number, number of BTUs, voltage, and accessories change on some models, the description stays exactly the same across the board on many of them...people often search on Google by model number, and I worry that if I put rel = canonical, then the result for that specific model they're looking for won't come up, just the one that everything is being redirected to. (and people do this much more than entering a site nowadays and searching by product model, it's easier). Excuse my ignorance on this stuff, I'm good with link building and content creation, but the behind-the-scenes aspects... not so much: Can I "rel=canonical" only part of the page of the repeat models (the long description)? so people can still search by model number, and reach the model they are looking for? Am I misunderstanding something here about rel=canonical (Interesting thing, I rank very high for these pages with tons of repeat descriptions, number one in many places... but wonder if google attributes a sort of "across the site" penalty for the repeated content... but wouldn't ranking number 1 for these pages mean nothing's wrong?. Thanks)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DavidCiti1 -
301 issues
Hi, I have this site: www.berenjifamilylaw.com. We did a 301 from the old site: www.bestfamilylawattorney.com to the one above. It's been several weeks now and Google has indexed the new site, but still pulls the old one on search terms like: Los Angeles divorce lawyer. I'm curious, does anyone have experience with this? How long does it take for Google to remove the old site and start serving the new one as a search result? Any ideas or tips would be appreciated. Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mrodriguez14400 -
Is this all that is needed for a 'canonical' tag?
Hello, I have a Joomla site. I have put in a plugin to make the page source show: eg. <link href="[http://www.ditalia.com.au/designer-fabrics-designer-fabric-italian-material-and-french-lace](view-source:http://www.ditalia.com.au/designer-fabrics-designer-fabric-italian-material-and-french-lace)" rel="<a class="attribute-value">canonical</a>" /> Is this all that is need to tell the search engines to ignore the any other links or indexed pages with a url which is created automatically by the system before the SEF urls are initiated?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | infinart0 -
Canonical tag
Hi all, I have an ecommerce client and on the pages they have a drop down so customers can view via price, list etc. Natrurally I want a canonical tag on these pages, here's the question. as they have different pages of products, the canonical tag on http://www.thegreatgiftcompany.com/occassion/christmas#items-/occassion/christmas/page=7/?sort=price_asc,searchterm=,layout=grid,page=1 is to http://www.thegreatgiftcompany.com/occassion/christmas#items-/occassion/christmas/page=7. now, because the page=7 is a duplicate of the main page, shouldn't the canonical just be to the main page rather than page=7? Even when there is a canonical tag on the /Christmas/page=7 to the /Christmas page? hope that makes sense to everyone!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KarlBantleman0 -
Canonical referencing and aspx
The following pages of my website all end up at the same place:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | IPROdigital
http://example.com/seo/Default.aspx
http://example.com/SEO/
http://example.com/seo
http://example.com/sEo
http://example.com/SeO but we have a really messy URL structure throughout the website. I would like to have a neat URL structure, including for offline marketing so customers can easily memorize or even guess the URL. I'm thinking of duplicating the pages and canonical referencing the original ones with the messy URLs instead of a 301 redirect (done for each individual page of course), because the latter will likely result in a traffic drop. We've got tens of thousands of URLs; some active and some inactive. Bearing in mind that thousands of links already point in to the site and even a small percentage drop in traffic would be a serious problem given low industry margins and high marketing spend, I'd love to hear opinions of people who have encountered this issue and found it problematic or successful. @randfish to the rescue. I hope.0 -
What is the proper syntax for rel="canonical" ??
I believe the proper syntax is like this [taken from the SEOMoz homepage]: However, one of the sites I am working on has all of their canonical tags set up like this: I should clarify, not all of their canonicals are identical to this one, they simply use this naming convention, which appears to be relative URLs instead of absolute. Doesn't the entire URL need to be in the tag? If that is correct, can you also provide me with an explanation that I can give to management please? They hate it when I say "Because I said so!" LOL
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | danatanseo0 -
Rel="prev" and rel="next" implementation
Hi there since I've started using semoz I have a problem with duplicate content so I have implemented on all the pages with pagination rel="prev" and rel="next" in order to reduce the number of errors but i do something wrong and now I can't figure out what it is. the main page url is : alegesanatos.ro/ingrediente/ and for the other pages : alegesanatos.ro/ingrediente/p2/ - for page 2 alegesanatos.ro/ingrediente/p3/ - for page 3 and so on. We've implemented rel="prev" and rel="next" according to google webmaster guidelines without adding canonical tag or base link in the header section and we still get duplicate meta title error messages for this pages. Do you think there is a problem because we create another url for each page instead of adding parameters (?page=2 or ?page=3 ) to the main url alegesanatos.ro/ingrediente?page=2 thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dan_panait0 -
Confusing 301 / Canonical Redirect Issue - Wizard Needed
I had two pages on my site with identical content. What I did was 301 redirect one page to the other. I also added canonical redirect code to the page that held the 301 code. Here is what I have: www.careersinmusic.com/music-colleges.aspx - this page was a duplicate and I needed it to resolve to:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 4Buck
www.careersinmusic.com/music-schools.aspx Here is the code I used: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX music-colleges.aspx
<%@ Page Language="VB" AutoEventWireup="false" CodeFile="music-colleges.aspx.vb" Inherits="music_colleges" %>
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> http://www.careersinmusic.com/music-schools.aspx"/> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
music-colleges.aspx.vb
Partial Class music_colleges
Inherits System.Web.UI.Page
Protected Sub Page_Load(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles Me.Load
Response.Status = "301 Moved Permanently"
Response.AddHeader("Location", "http://www.careersinmusic.com/music-schools.aspx")
End Sub
End Class XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX The problem:
For some reason, when the search “music colleges” is done in Google, I am #7. When the term “music schools” is done, I am around 119. I MUST be getting a penalty for some reason, I just cannot figure the reason. When perform well for one term and terrible for the next? All I can come up with is a duplicate content penalty or something along those lines. Also, music-colleges.aspx seems to still be in Googles index, even though the above 301 happened months ago. Thoughts? site:www.careersinmusic.com/music-colleges.aspx Any insight into this would be GREATLY appreciated. Many Thanks!0
