Silly question about noindex and canonical
-
Hi,
This is probably going to sound a bit stupid, but I nevertheless want to check.
We have a site that's going to have identical pages (really not my choice) for a sales reason. The two examples would be example.com/profile-name and example.com/location/profile-name
Users using the onsite navigation will always end up in the latter example naturally as they have to select a location before viewing content (plus having the location in the url is nice as there are multiple profiles across different locations that have the same name). However, it's easier to sell our services when we can offer just example.com/profile-name to users for their own marketing reasons.
I'd like to make the example.com/profile-name noindex follow, and have just the example.com/location/profile-name indexed, but not sure if it would be better to implement canonical tags instead? Can anyone see any potential pitfalls of using either method or does it not really make a difference (which is what I suspect, but I'd rather look stupid than get this wrong)?
Thanks!
-
Unfortunately we can't redirect from the shorter to the longer as those we are selling the profile spaces to want to be able to see example.com/profile-name on the browser
-
Thanks for the input guys! Will implement a canonical then.
-
Definitely use canonical. I use it on all my pages for the same problem.
As Gagan said: Using noindex - will make the page out of search engines index...
Hope i helped.
-
Dont make them noindex, rather use canonical tag.
Using noindex - will make the page out of search engines index.But using canonical - It not only gives a strong indication to search Engines that the canonical page is the best page and rest are duplicates, But, it also passes on existing page Authority from duplicate pages to the canonical page
Trust it help !!
-
There are two solutions, one which is canoncialisation pointing to the correct location, the other (which i prefer for this kind of thing) is to implement 301 redirects from the shorter url.
I think that is ideal because you are saying it's easier to tell people to go to that location, thats fine and great, but we want search to hit the real page - so therefore the second / landing page doesn't need to exist ... just redirect it and avoid confusion.
hope that makes sense
-
Hi Philip,
I did a lot of research on a similar issue a few months back. I am certain that Google recommends canonical tag to resolve the issue of duplicate content. That should be the way to go about it.
It's easy to implement and works just perfect.
Hope it 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
-
"Google-selected canonical different to user-declared" - issues
Hi Moz! We are having issues on a number of our international sites where Google is choosing our page 2 of a category as the canonical over page 1. Example; https://www.yoursclothing.de/kleider-grosse-groessen (Image attached). We currently use infinite loading, however when javascript is disabled we have a text link to page 2 which is done via a query string of '?filter=true&view=X&categoryid=X&page=2' Page 2 is blocked via robots.txt and has a canonical pointing at page 1. Due to Google selecting page 2 as the canonical, the page is no longer ranking. For the main keyphrase a subcategory page is ranking poorly. LqDO0qr
On-Page Optimization | | RemarkableAgency1 -
The links pointed to a multilanguage site, should increase the DA? (Wordpress question inside)
We are planning to make our site available to several language, using the plugin WPML in Wordpress. The site should look with /es/, /fr, etc. If someone point to an URL in the spanish version, the english version get any benefit from it? (better search ranking or something like that). Some side question: WPML works fine with SEO and Moz?
On-Page Optimization | | carlostinca0 -
URL question
When we type in the URL of www.JustBunkBeds.com on firefox we end up with (S) in URL https://www.justbunkbeds.com/ When we type in the URL of www.JustBunkBeds.com on Explorer we end up with http://www.justbunkbeds.com/ Appreciate answer to this question Tony
On-Page Optimization | | OCFurniture0 -
Help! A couple of basic questions on dup. content, pagination and tumblr blogs.
Hi, and many thanks in advance for any assistance. According to our GWMT we currently have over a thousand duplicated title tags and meta descriptions. These stem from tabs that we have located beneath the body copy, which when you click on them display offers or itineraries (we're a travel company). So the URLs change to having "?st=Offer" or "?st=Itinerary" at the end, and are considered to be duplicating the original page's title and meta des. Sometimes the original page is also paginated, and shows the same duplication errors. What would be the best way to ensure we're not duplicating anything? Also, we have a tumblr blog, where there's single page displaying all the blog content, but also links to each blog on a separate individual page. We would like to keep the individual pages as we can optimise to target specific keywords, but want to avoid any duplication issues again. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
On-Page Optimization | | LV70 -
Dealing with thin content/95% duplicate content - canonical vs 301 vs noindex
My client's got 14 physical locations around the country but has a webpage for each "service area" they operate in. They have a Croydon location. But a separate page for London, Croydon, Essex, Luton, Stevenage and many other places (areas near Croydon) that the Croydon location serves. Each of these pages is a near duplicate of the Croydon page with the word Croydon swapped for the area. I'm told this was a SEO tactic circa 2001. Obviously this is an issue. So the question - should I 301 redirect each of the links to the Croydon page? Or (what I believe to be the best answer) set a rel=canonical tag on the duplicate pages). Creating "real and meaningful content" on each page isn't quite an option, sorry!
On-Page Optimization | | JamesFx0 -
Canonical tags
In previous we had issues with capital letters in page urls. So we made a 301 redirection to lower case page url. But I read there that it's not good idea to use 301 redirection, better solution for that canonical tag. So we placed canonical url tak to lower case page url... So after week, in google webmaster tools I see around 60k os dublicate pages. Why google don't see canonical tag? Thank you
On-Page Optimization | | bele0 -
What does Canonical mean?
Hi, I was wondering what is meant by canonical? I ran a test on my site and in the notices, SEOMOZ came back with a total of 90 canonicals. As far as I can tell, it refers to the preferred page (not really sure what that means though). I thought initially it was talking about duplicate content, but all the pages are totally different. There is no duplicate content on any of he pages that it lists. So I'm not sure how to fix this. Thanks for the help. Don
On-Page Optimization | | ge01734000 -
Rel canonical Issue
I have a huge rel canonical issue showing up on my website, and I'm not sure that I fully understand why. To my knowledge, this is something that comes about when alternate urls are used to link to the same page. However, this is not a technique that I've used with my website, yet it's still raising a flag on just about every page. http://bit.ly/jYyTYN Can anyone enlighten me on what's causing this? Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | JayAdams320