I need to know more clearance on rel=canonical usage than 301 redirects ?
-
Hi all SEOmozs,
As we all know purposes of rel=canonical , I have a query to ask that If we don't have any possibility to use 301 redirects on a domain , can it be really right to use rel=canonical on an old domain to let search engine to treat those all pages should be not priority where the domain we are being promoted in the market to list up instead that. I found this interesting Matt Cutts video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJK5Uloy76g where he has told or cleared the point very nicely, yes we can use it if there is no possibility in your older domain or pages. So here i am asking the same to know more detailed clarity on this so that i can be more confidence on it.
I have been seeing issues in my domains where old one domain comes than new domain why with new domain contents, and can it be really very good to bring new domain with **rel=canonical without using 301 redirect :
Old : kanin.com (leaving) New : kangarokanin.com (promoting)Where i might have not used yet the rel=canonical in old domain, will be going to use it soon , after finishing this discussion.**
Regards,
Teginder Ravi -
The thumbs up Dr. Pete,
You definitely explain that much better than I could. And completely agree once the 301 in place there should be nothing else associated with it.
Teginder
I thought I would send this link with a screenshot from Google searching for staplers Google I noticed in your screenshots you are logged in to Google I just wanted you to know if you're constantly searching for staplers and your URL Google will modify the search to suit what it thinks is your needs. Hence I did a very unscientific incognito check allowing Google to give me a less biased search result. to make it more useful high logged into SEM Rush and searched staplers and received what you can find inside the CVS file for the top 10 organic results. So you know this is what came up In the photographs is different from what SEM Rush and Google are telling me.
https://blueprintmarketing.sharefile.com/d/scdb1ed7e9464929b
The very best of luck with your new website.
Sincerely,
Thomas Zickell
-
The thumbs up Dr. Pete,
You definitely explain that much better than I could. And completely agree once the 301 in place there should be nothing else associated with it.
Teginder
I thought I would send this link with a screenshot from Google searching for staplers Google I noticed in your screenshots you are logged in to Google I just wanted you to know if you're constantly searching for staplers and your URL Google will modify the search to suit what it thinks is your needs. Hence I did a very unscientific incognito check allowing Google to give me a less biased search result. to make it more useful high logged into SEM Rush and searched staplers and received what you can find inside the CVS file for the top 10 organic results. So you know this is what came up In the photographs is different from what SEM Rush and Google are telling me.
https://blueprintmarketing.sharefile.com/d/scdb1ed7e9464929b
The very best of luck with your new website.
Sincerely,
Thomas Zickell
-
Thanks Dr. Pete for lighting more on this comparing with 301 redirects & rel tags.
-
One thing that I almost always see overlooked in these discussion - 301 and canonical have totally different impacts on the visitors to your site. A 301 will take the visitor to the new site, whereas a canonical won't. If you're really trying to phase out the old domain, canonicals could be self-defeating, because people won't know the site has moved and they'll still bookmark, tweet, link to, etc. the old URLs.
Keep in mind, too, that cross-domain canonicals are at Google's discretion. While they often work, and can pass PageRank, they're sometimes ignored. The are cases where canonicals may be safer, such as if you suspect the old domain carries a penalty. For a full site move, though, I'd almost always go with 301s.
-
Hi Teginder, When you apply the 301 Redirect to the new webpage Google will actually no longer index it it will believe that it has just become a part of the pages just pointed at meaning you literally could set the rel tags but that's all you'd have to do you definitely do not need to worry about. I hope I was of help Sincerely , Thomas Zickell
-
I want to know one more thing that i am going to use and bring new domain pages with using rel=canonical tags where there is no possibility of 301 redirect use WITH , I just want to know that Will Google not to index the pages where i will use noindex and get to know that the same page has been letting to move new primary versions of the page to crawl and index them. Regards, Teginder Ravi
-
prior to changing domains you want to do exactly this
with rel=canonical without using 301 redirect :
Old : kanin.com (leaving) New : kangarokanin.com (promoting)** that will get Google on the same track but you really don't want take long before implementing the 301 redirect maybe 24 hours.**
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
-
Rel Canonical, Follow/No Follow in htaccess?
Very quick question, are rel canonical, follow/no follow tags, etc. written in the htaccess file?
Technical SEO | | moon-boots0 -
Rel Canonical Crawl Notices
Hello, Within the Moz report from the crawl of my site, it shows that I had 89 Rel Canonical notices. I noticed that all the pages on my site have a rel canonical tag back to the same page the tag is on. Specific example from my site is as follows: http://www.automation-intl.com/resistance-welding-equipment has a Rel Canonical tag <link rel="<a class="attribute-value">canonical</a>" href="http://www.automation-intl.com/resistance-welding-equipment" />. Is this self reference harmless and if so why does it create a notice in the crawl? Thanks in advance.
Technical SEO | | TopFloor0 -
Product Level 301 Redirects Best Practice
When creating a 301 mapping file for product pages, what is best practice
Technical SEO | | Bucktown
for which version of the URL to redirect to? Base directory or one
subdirectory/category path. Example Old URL: www.example.com/clothing/pants/blue-pants-123 Which of the following should be the new target URL: www.example.com/apparel/pants/blue-pants-123 www.example.com/apparel/blue-apparel/blue-pants-123 www.example.com/apparel/collections/spring-collection/blue-pants-123 www.example.com/blue-pants-123 This is assuming the canonical tag will be www.example.com/blue-pants-123. Also, if www.example.com/blue-pants-123 cannot be reached via site
navigation would it be detrimental to make that the target URL if Google
cannot crawl that naturally? Thanks0 -
Does 301 redirect of old filenames still work?
I have gone through several revisions of my site. We used to have only static pages in HTML. I had search-engine-optimization.html changed to seo-philippines.html changed to /seo-philippines/ I 301 redirected all of them whenever I change the filenames. This is in the course of 6 years worth of link building and I'm wondering if this has an effect because our rankings go down everytime we do this.
Technical SEO | | optimind0 -
301 Redirect Have no ranking
Hi Guys wonder if you can help my site www.economy-car-leasing.co.uk has just been 301 from www.economyleasinguk.co.uk The reason for the move is the site is going to be structured for both cars and vans separately we did the 301 around 8 weeks ago and initially we thought everything went well, all the new site was indexed within 24 hours, we updated WMT on the old site we monitored around 150 keywords many were top 10 in Google 99% were top 5 pages However 8 weeks on we do not rank for hardly anything, i have confirmed all the redirects are working, we have 200 ok from the home page and all the other canonical pages return 301 we just implemented the canonical tag to all pages. we did factor that we will get some down time but not 8 weeks worth, i have done a 301 on this scale before with no real loss of rankings (Different site) Really tempted to put the old site back however its not what i want to do, Bing seems to have picked up on the change really well but im thinking Google just needs time The change looks like its done perfectly and everything is working as it should however it looks like that none of the original rankings or juice has been pushed over from Google yet and im wondering how long does it typically take to get the site ranking again site have gone from 17k unique s per month to less than 2k Paul
Technical SEO | | kellymandingo0 -
Canonical usage and duplicate content
Hi We have a lot of pages about areas like ie. "Mallorca" (domain.com/Spain/Mallorca), with tabbed pages like "excursion" (domain.com/spain/Mallorca/excursions) and "car rental" (domain.com/Spain/Mallorca/car-rental) etc. The text on ie the "car rental"-page is very similar on Mallorca and Rhodos, and seomoz marks these as duplicate content. This happens on "car rental", "map", "weather" etc. which not have a lot of text but images and google maps inserted. Could i use rel=nex/prev/canonical to gather the information from the tabbed pages? That could show google that the Rhodos-map page is related to Rhodos and not Mallorca. Is that all wrong or/and is there a better way to do this? Thanks, Alsvik
Technical SEO | | alsvik0 -
I think I'm stuck in a 301 redirect loop
Hi all, I'm trying to correct some of my duplicate content errors. The site is built on Miva Merchant and the storefront page, /SFNT.html, needs to be permanently redirected to www.mydomain.com This is what my .htaccess file looks like: #RedirectPermanent /index.html http://dev.mydomain.com/mm5/merchant.mvc? RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} !^dev.mydomain.com$ [NC] RewriteRule ^(.*) http://dev.emydomain.com/$1 [L,R=301] DirectoryIndex index.html index.htm index.php /mm5/merchant.mvc redirect 301 /SFNT.html http://dev.mydomain.com/ RewriteCond %{QUERY_STRING} Screen=SFNT&Store_Code=MYSTORECODE [NC] When I use this code and navigate to http://dev.mydomain.com/SFNT.html the URL gets rewritten as http://dev.mydomain.com/?Screen=SFNT So I believe this is what's called a "redirect loop".... Can anyone provide any insight? I'm not a developer, but have been tasked with cleaning up the problems on the website and can use any input anyone is willing to offer. Thanks, jr
Technical SEO | | Technical_Contact0 -
Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical
When using the On page report card I get a critical error on Rel Canonical Im not sure if I have understood this right but I think that my problem is that I own a Norwegian Domain name which is www.danske-båten.no This domain works great in norwegian, but I get problems with english (foreign) browsers. My english domain name is http://www.danske-båten.no. When you buy a domain name with the letter Å you get a non norwegian domain name as well. (dont quite get the tecnical aspect of it) Så when I publish a page (using wordpress if that means anything) I get this message: Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical Moderate fix <dl> <dt>Canonical URL</dt> <dd>"http://www.danske-båten.no/ferge-oslo-københavn/"</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>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.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>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.</dd> <dd>So What to do to fix this?
Technical SEO | | stlastla
</dd> </dl>0