Canonical in head best practice
-
Hi
Is putting a list of canonical no follow links in the head the best practice? From SEO Moz analysis urls of duplicate content was flagged but now I have lots of cononicals in the head of my doc and the code looks untidy
see head here : http://carpetflooringsdirect.com/
Is there a cleaner way of doing this? and how do I retest to see if I have fixed?
Many thanks
Matt
-
Add a screenshot of the errors. This will give us more info to be able to help you.
-
So i have told the search engines not to follow.
No you haven't. You have told the search engines that homepage is a canonical version of all these other URLs, which doesn't make sense and is most probably confusing the engines.
I would remove these asap.
Then take a closer look at the error craw diagnostic summary. Perhaps include a screenshot if you're still unsure.
The canonical tag is to tell search engines which version of the page to index if you have variations of the same page which could occur through querystring parameters or something simple like this:
In this scenario you would simple add a this to the <HEAD> section of your index.html page to tell Google to only index http://www.example.com/ since index is exactly the same page.
I would have a read up here as to the correct use of canonical tags - http://www.seomoz.org/learn-seo/canonicalization
Cheers,
Woody
-
THanks for this I have remover although I still havent solved my Duplicate content problem...
-
You should definitely remove those canonical tags ASAP.
Each page should only have one canonical tag - the correct canonical URL for that page.
Hope that helps!
-
THanks Woody - Yes im just down the road...
The Dashboard (craw diagnostic summary) flagged up the Urls as duplicates. So i have told the search engins not to follow - Is this not what I was suposed to do?
Matt
-
Hi there,
Not quite sure what you're trying to achieve here, but this is certainly not how the canonical tag is used.
I would remove these asap from the homepage before something negative happens to your rankings.
What are you trying to achieve? What was the duplicate content issue?
Woody
Oh, BTW - if your profile name is where you're located, I'm just down the A12 from you in Colchester.
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
-
Dealing with broken internal links/404s. What's best practice?
I've just started working on a website that has generated lots (100s) of broken internal links. Essentially specific pages have been removed over time and nobody has been keeping an eye on what internal links might have been affected. Most of these are internal links that are embedded in content which hasn't been updated following the page's deletion. What's my best way to approach fixing these broken links? My plan is currently to redirect where appropriate (from a specific service page that doesn't exist to the overall service category maybe?) but there are lots of pages that don't have a similar or equivalent page. I presume I'll need to go through the content removing the links or replacing them where possible. My example is a specific staff member who no longer works there and is linked to from a category page, should i be redirecting from the old staff member and updating the anchor text, or just straight up replacing the whole thing to link to the right person? In most cases, these pages don't rank and I can't think of many that have any external websites linking to them. I'm over thinking all of this? Please help! 🙂
Technical SEO | | Adam_SEO_Learning0 -
Content Duplication and Canonical Tag settings
Hi all, I have a question regarding content duplication.My site has posted one fresh content in the article section and set canonical in the same page for avoiding content duplication._But another webmaster has taken my post and posted the same in his site with canonical as his site url. They have not given to original source as well._May I know how Google will consider these two pages. Which site will be affected with content duplication by Google and how can I solve this issue?If two sites put canonical tags in there own pages for the same content how the search engine will find the original site which posted fresh content. How can we avoid content duplication in this case?
Technical SEO | | zco_seo0 -
What is the best strategy for a company in various countries?
Hello I have to make yt SEO marketing strategy for a company that provides services in Spain, Colombia and Mexico
Technical SEO | | interficto
I'm looking at two options: Buy different domains (TLD): This option seems feasible but very expensive and manage each domain position it would have to have different content in each (plus you would not know that because it is put exactly the same domain) Place each service and country folders eg
www.dominio.com / mexico / training-financiero.html
www.dominio.com / espana / training-financiero.html I have understood that option 1 is no longer necessary since you can use html tags within the code to tell Google that you try to target content to customers from a different country.
In principle we would use the same content would change only a few words and of course the currency to suit the local currency of each country. However I believe that customers could rely more on a domain if their country. Plus I'm afraid I google indexed as duplicate content is another matter What country would main that could confuse the visitor?0 -
Rel Canonical errors after seomoz crawling
Hi to all, I can not find which are the errors in my web pages with the tag cannonical ref. I have to many errors over 500 after seomoz crawling my domain and I don't know how to fix it. I share my URL for root page: http://www.vour.gr My rel canonical tag for this page is: http://www.vour.gr"/> Can anyone help me why i get error for this page? Many thanks.
Technical SEO | | edreamis0 -
Rel=canonical + no index
We have been doing an a/b test of our hp and although we placed a rel=canonical tag on the testing page it is still being indexed. In fact at one point google even had it showing as a sitelink . We have this problem through out our website. My question is: What is the best practice for duplicate pages? 1. put only a rel= canonical pointing to the "wanted original page" 2. put a rel= canonical (pointing to the wanted original page) and a no index on the duplicate version Has anyone seen any detrimental effect doing # 2? Thanks
Technical SEO | | Morris770 -
Best way to use affiliate links
What is the best practice to use amazon affliate links in blog posts? I have read different opinions on this, and want to be sure I'm using best practices. I sometimes link to amazon with an affiliate link on some of my posts, and am working on a top ten Christmas gift ideas for Children born with Down syndrome with lots of affiliate links on it. I'm want to be sure I'm using best practices when adding links like this. Tanks!
Technical SEO | | NoahsDad0 -
Google +1 not recognizing rel-canonical
So I have a few pages with the same content just with a different URL. http://nadelectronics.com/products/made-for-ipod/VISO-1-iPod-Music-System http://nadelectronics.com/products/speakers/VISO-1-iPod-Music-System http://nadelectronics.com/products/digital-music/VISO-1-iPod-Music-System All pages rel-canonical to:
Technical SEO | | kevin4803
http://nadelectronics.com/products/made-for-ipod/VISO-1-iPod-Music-System My question is... why can't google + (or facebook and twitter for that matter) consolidate all these pages +1. So if the first two had 5 +1 and the rel-canonical page had 5 +1's. It would be nice for all pages to display 15 +1's not 5 on each. It's my understanding that Google +1 will gives the juice to the correct page. So why not display all the +1's at the same time. Hope that makes sense.0