High level rel=canonical conceptual question
-
Hi community. Your advice and perspective is greatly appreciated.
We are doing a site replatform and I fear that serious SEO fundamentals were overlooked and I am not getting straight answers to a simple question: How are we communicating to search engines the single URL we want indexed?
Backstory: Current site has major duplicate content issues. Rel-canonical is not used. There are currently 2 versions of every category and product detail page. Both are indexed in certain instances. A 60 page audit has recommends rel=canonical at least 10 times for the similar situations an ecommerce site has with dupe urls/content.
New site: We are rolling out 2 URLS AGAIN!!! URL A is an internal URL generated by the systerm. We have developed this fancy dynamic sitemap generator which looks/maps to URL A and creates a SEO optimized URL that I call URL B. URL B is then inserted into the site map and the sitemap is communicated externally to google. URL B does an internal 301 redirect back to URL A...so in an essence, the URL a customer sees is not the same as what we want google to see.
I still think there is potential for duplicate indexing. What do you think?
Is rel=canonical the answer?
In my research on this site, past projects and google I think the correct solution is this on each customer facing category and pdp:
The head section (With the optimized Meta Title and Meta Description) needs to have the rel-canonical pointing to URL B
example of the meta area of URL A:What do you think? I am open to all ideas and I can provide more details if needed.
-
Yes, if you redirect URL B, it will not be indexed as content. It will be ignored by Google.
Well... Not ignored, but Google will acknowledge the URL B shouldn't be indexed.
-
Hi guys. I have researched and discussed further.
According to your thoughts, the rel=canonical and 301 redirect in the description in the original post will conflict with each other.
In all honestly, I stated that rel=canonical is being used (I am fighting for it) but it is not in the future state plan.
I will restate a similar situation (with what I think the same outcome is). If we 301 redirect URL B (optimized in sitemap) back to URL A (system generated) without rel=canonical then ultimately we are saying "don't index URL b"???
-
I will verify the fine details of the internal 301 redirect. The entire process as described to me seems a bit fishy also. The developers keep saying "the site map is the only thing that will be indexed" which we know is false.
Ultimately the real solution was getting URL A to be the most optimized.
Thanks, and more to com
-
HI,
I think you are going to have problems as you describe it (if I understood it correctly). 301s and canonicals are not the same thing, the 301 is actually taking you to the second page, the canonical is suggesting which page you want to be considered the main page to index. In your case you are declaring pageB in the sitemp, 301ing that to pageA and then recommending pageB be considered the main page (which is 301ing back to pageA again). The results of that is difficult to predict to say the least. I would think the most likely result is your pageA results being indexed, but only after making life difficult for googlebot et al by running them through this loop.
Is there no chance of fixing the cms so that the pageB urls can be displayed properly without a 301?
-
I don't understand the purpose of the 301 redirect. If you are redirecting your fancy URL, that is "SEO optimized"-- then you are doing nothing. The only thing that will be indexed will be the non-fancy URL. If you 301 redirect anything, that page will not be indexed, so making a keyword-rich URL is useless. Instead, I would use only canonical tags.
So, for example, let's say you have a product page. And it's at example.com/product-name/
But it's also in other places example.com/tags/vases/product-name/
General accepted SEO practices would say that all of the additional or supplemental pages should have the rel=canonical point to the "original." (Not redirected back to the original.)
However, because Google seems to be favoring breadcrumbs more than ever-- you might want to pick a page with breadcrumbs (Page B) and make that page the canonical. You could try it both ways with different products and see how it goes.
Now, please bear in mind that I just thought of this as I was answering your question, and this is just something to think about- I haven't actually tried this, but I might...
In other words, if I had:
example.com/400-watt-halide-bulb/
but I also had it in:
example.com/light-bulbs/halide/400-watt-halide-bulb/
I might point all examples of that product to the longer, breadcrumbed URL with the canonical link. But again, just thinking out loud.
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
-
Canonical tags for duplicate listings
Hi there, We are restructuring a website. The website originally lists jobs that will have duplicate content. We have tried to ask the client not to use duplicates but apparently their industry is not something they can control. The recommendations I had is to have categories (which will have the idea description for a group of jobs), and the job listing pages. The job listing pages will then have canonical tags pointing to the category page as the primary URL to be indexed. Another opinion came from a third party that this can be seen as if we are tricking Google and would get penalised, **Is that even true? **Why would Google penalise for this if thats their recommendations in the first place? This third party suggested using nofollow on the links to these listings, or even not not index them all together. What are your thoughts? Thanks Issa
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | iQi0 -
Question about structuring @id schema tags
We are using JSON-LD to apply schema. My colleague had question about applying @id tags in the schema parent lists: While implementing schema, we've included @id as a parameter to both the "list" child of "ListItem" of a "BreadcrumbList" - on the same schema, we've added an @id parameter to mainContentOfPage and both @id parameters are set to the pages URL. Having this @id in both places is giving schema checker results that have the child elements of "mainContentOfPage" appearing under the "list" item. Questions: is this good or bad? Where should @id be used? What should @id be set to? Thanks for the insight!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RosemaryB0 -
High Bounce Rate
Hi Mozzers, I wanted to discuss bounce rates as i am trying to drive my websites down and would appreciate some pointers. Firstly, the facts. Ours is an e-commerce website we attract 10000-12000 visitor a month, 8000 of which land on a single page and the other 4000 rest of website. On a whole the rest of the website has a bounce rate of 48-56% which im fairly comfortable about, but have made small gains with little changes. The problem is the single page attracting 8000 visitors. The page is an informative article about the various types of a select product and its most common uses. When i started the page had no internal links and was suffering from a 88% bounce rate. I have since inserted products into every sub-section of the post and lots of links to products, category pages etc. This has gone really well and the pages linked from it attracted 1000 more views month 1, and 1500 month 2 with the bounce rate dropping to 76% (small win). However I am still not happy as this is still very high. I would like to work towards dropping it below 60%. The article attracts traffic from hundreds of longtail keywords around the subject "different types of this product". The average time spent on the page is 4-5 minutes so I know people are reading the article and finding it useful. How else can I look to encourage more click-through?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ATP0 -
URL Question and Advice on Site Architecture
Good morning one and all, i have a specific question pertaining to my Domain Migration Website URL structure. I have a computer repair business that I am re branding and my question at this point is centrally focused on how to best handle my URL naming structure that will best suite my needs for my the Search Engines and also my customers UX while not looking SPAMMY I am a web developer and SEO and I am building a SILO Site Architecture in WordPress using Pages (not Posts) so no discussion is need on the Permalink structure. I am attaching several Images below of Screen Shots of the new site that I have designed so that you may look at them and see the Silo Architecture Layout in action for the most part. OK, here we go. Looking at the Silo Mast Head, we can see that the following Main Menu items each represent a specific Silo Theme Silo Theme # 1 - COMPUTER REPAIR Silo Theme # 2 - VIRUS REMOVAL Silo Theme # 3 - PHONE REPAIR Silo Theme # 4 - NETWORKING Silo Theme # 5 - DATA RECOVERY My specific question is, if /computer-repair/ is a main silo theme (WP -Parent Page) and /laptop-repair/ is a (Child Page) of Computer Repair is the following example below (the actual URL string) going to 'trigger' a SPAM signal to either the user or GOOGLE or both?? URL String: http://www.pcmedicsoncall.com/computer-repair/laptop-repair/ Here's another example with the VIRUS REMOVAL SILO http://www.pcmedicsoncall.com/virus-removal/malware-removal/ Seeing how computer repair is the main silo theme that cannot be changed in the URL Structure (it can) but I wont change it seeing how COMPUTER REPAIR is the single largest keyword phrase used by individuals when they are looking for computer repair. Secondly, - LAPTOP REPAIR is also a Keyword Phrase that that has HIGH search queries that I am trying to rank for and that too (ideally) should also not changed! How do I deal with this situation? Or, am I seeing this in a overly paranoid way? I currently have the site allowing only my IP Address so I am afraid that the screen shots below is all that I can do on this in lieu of actually visiting the Site Currently, I have my URL Structure where Wilmington NC immediately follows the targeted keyword phrase for the Silo Theme like below http://www.pcmedicsoncall.com/virus-removal-wilmington-nc/malware-removal/ The example above, - including the location after the keyword phrase does look much more attractive and breaks it up so it does not read SPAMMY and it will help with SEO but yet another problem exists using the location after the keyword phrase which I explain in detail Below. On top of doing a complete re-branding Domain Change I am actually going to be relocating myself and my business to Charlotte, NC at the end of the summer so I have serious doubts if using Wilmington NC within the URL structure would be a wise idea considering that I will be relocating and an internal 301 Redirect on a Newly Migrated site 2-3 months after the initial site migration and site setup may have some negative impact and confuse Google and compound the situation thus much further despite the fact that it would immediately help me bounce back up with my rankings after the migration process. Thoughts a suggestions on both explained scenarios please? I have asked this specif question once already but obviously people do not read my very detailed and well thought out questions. This can also be viewed here>http://www.seomoz.org/q/need-very-urgent-advice-on-wedsite-migration-questions-please#reply_150847> Thank you Sincerely, Marshall Thompson SEOMOZ-PC-MEDICS-ON-CALL-1.jpg SEOMOZ-PC-MEDICS-ON-CALL1.jpg
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MarshallThompson310 -
Keyword Question: How to Target my Niche
Hello, I'm a health coach helping people with multiple sclerosis. Here's my website: bobweikel(dot)com What do you think the top 4 local keywords would be for my niche? I'm in Boise ID. I'm thinking MS Boise MS Boise Idaho Multiple Sclerosis Boise Multiple Sclerosis Boise Idaho With your intuition, do you think these are valuable keywords for a coaching site? Also, can you think of any other keywords? I want this 100% white hat.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobGW0 -
Sitemap.xml Question
I am pretty new to SEO and I have been creating new pages for our website for niche terms. Should I include ALL pages on our website in the sitemap.xml or should I only have our "main" pages listed on the sitemap.xml file? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | threebiz0 -
Does having a high number of reciprocal links hurt you?
I know reciprocal linking isn't ideal, but does it actually hurt your site? Is there any penalty for having a high number of reciprocal links?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
Rel canonical element for different URL's
Hello, We have a new client that has several sites with the exact same content. They do this for tracking purposes. We are facing political objections to combine and track differently. Basically, we have no choice but to deal with the situation given. We want to avoid duplicate content issues, and want to SEO only one of the sites. The other sites don't really matter for SEO (they have off-line campaigns pointing to them) we just want one of the sites to get all the credit for the content. My questions: 1. Can we use the rel canonical element on the irrelevent pages/URL's to point to the site we care about? I think I remember Matt Cutts saying this can't be done across URL's. Am I right or wrong? 2. If we can't, what options do I have (without making the client change their entire tracking strategy) to make the site we are SEO'ing the relevant content? Thanks a million! Todd
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GravitateOnline0