Rel Canonical
-
hi folks
sorry i really am confused and not very good with technical terms
i have 553 Rel Canonical notices but i cant understand what Rel Canonical actually means it kinda sounds like there links that go nowhere to help the seo ranking? am i right or just in way over my head?
please use the most basic language you can
cheers
donal
-
The "Notice" level is just telling you that your pages all have rel=canonical elements on them, and they all seem to be pointing to themselves. This is really just a heads up, and doesn't indicate a problem, per se.
As you grow, I think you may want to control how some of your very similar pages are indexed, such as color and quantity variations. These pages can look "thin" to Google, in that they're very similar. Currently, though, your site is small enough that it shouldn't be a big issue, and our notice is the lowest least severe message (notice < warning < error).
The rel=canonical element basically tells Google that two URLs are equivalent or very similar, and to only allow one to rank. This helps control duplicates and avoid issues with Panda or having Google filter out pages in unexpected ways.
-
im still totally confused but ill make the question different is it a good thing to have 553 Rel Canonical things or should i try get rid/fix them??
-
Canonical URL's are two url's that point to the exact same webpage.
It's not a link that users can click on or anything. It's like an invisible note to search engines that tells them there are other URL's on your website that point to the same page. It keeps search engines from getting confused.
-
Hi Donal
I really can't explain it better than the SEOMoz guide itself, which you can read here.
Getting the notices in the ranking report is not a bad thing at all - it only serves to remind you that you have the tags on your site and to make sure they're set up correctly.
Have a read through the guide given above, as it helps explain how and why we might want to use them in simple terms.
Hope this helps!
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
-
Do we need rel="prev" and rel="next" if we have a rel="canonical" for the first page of a series
Despite having a canonical on page 1 of a series of paginated pages for different topics, Google is indexing several, sometimes many pages in each topic. This is showing up as duplicate page title issues in Moz and Screaming Frog. Ideally Google would only index the first page in the series. Do we need to use rel="prev" etc rather than a canonical on page 1? How can we make sure Google crawls but doesn't index the rest of the series?
Moz Pro | | hjsand1 -
No more than one canonical url Tag.
I just got the "no more than one canonical url TAG" for this page http://www.vacuumadvisers.com/1/electrolux-ultra-active-deep-clean-bagless-canister-vacuum-cleaner-review. I have no idea how to Fix that. Tried google it but none for Tag in particular. PS. I have changed the Theme recently therefore so did the URL Anyone?
Moz Pro | | bishop230 -
I have double-checked the rel canonical is properly employed on our page but the On Page Grader says it's not working?
I have double-checked the rel canonical is properly employed on our page but the On Page Grader says it's not working Here is the URL - http://www.solidconcepts.com/industries/aerospace-parts-manufacturing/ What is wrong with how we are doing things?
Moz Pro | | StratasysDirectManufacturing0 -
Rel=canonical "redirects" to double links
Our devs have set up rel=canonical on our website. First they used relative links href="/dir1/dir2/dir3" for the page http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3/?detail1=1?detail2=2 meaning that it will redirect to http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3, but no luck, the MOZ dashboard showed the tag value to be http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3/dir1/dir2/dir3, then we have decided to rewrite the code, and now the canonical to http://wwwmysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3/?detail1=1?detail2=2 looks like href="http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3/" but the tag on MOZ looks like http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3. So what is the problem? I really got a problem or MOZ does? The code on website looks exactly like href="http://www.aaa.com/en/bbb/ccc/vvv/nnn/" rel="canonical" /> for the page http://www.aaa.com/en/bbb/ccc/vvv/nnn/
Moz Pro | | apartmentGin0 -
Duplicate titles reported with canonical
Hi Mozzers, In the reports it is saying that I have some duplicate content and titles even though there is a canonical tag on them, is anyone else getting this?
Moz Pro | | KarlBantleman0 -
Does the Crawl Diagnosis - Duplicate Page Content account for a canonical meta tags?
I see the same page listed 3 time (with different query params). But on each I have a meta tag pointing to the correct canonical url. By still seeing all three listed, does that mean there is an error with my meta tag?
Moz Pro | | Simantel0 -
Will canonical tag get rid of duplicate page title errors?
I have a directory on my website, paginated in groups of 10. On page 2 of the results, the title tag is the same as the first page, as it is on the 3rd page and so on. This is giving me duplicate page title errors. If i use rel=canonical tags on the subsequent pages and href the first page of my results, will my duplicate page title warnings go away? thanks.
Moz Pro | | fourthdimensioninc0 -
Can overly dynamic URLs be overcome with canonical meta tags?
I tried searching for questions regarding dynamic URLs and canonical tags, but I couldn't find anything s hopefully this hasn't been covered. There are a large number of overly dynamic URLs reported in our site crawl (>7,000). I haven't looked at each of these, but most of these either have a canonical meta tag or have are indicated as FOLLOW, NO INDEX pages. Will these be enough to overcome any negative SEO impact that may come from overly dynamic URLs? We are down to almost 0 critical errors and this is now the biggest problem reported by the site crawl after too many on page links.
Moz Pro | | afmaury0