Canonical
-
I have two identical sites with different urls. I placed the canonical tag in the 2nd site. Do I need to make all the internal links in the 2nd site point to the 1st site too?
FIRST SITE: www.aerlawgroup.com
SECOND SITE: www.losangelescitycriminaldefenseattorney.com
So should the internal links in www.losangelescitycriminaldefenseattorney.com point to www.aerlgroup.com? As well as using the canonical tag? Or does the canonical tag make it irrelevant to point the internal links from the 2nd site to the first?
-
Honestly, it depends a lot on the business case. In many cases, consolidating to one site has advantages, but there was some reason you split the sites, and I don't know that history. So, it can be tough to say whether you should abandon one site.
Certainly, if you do, and if you 301-redirect those pages from the abandoned site (which you should, unless that site was penalized), then that content on the stronger site should do well.
-
Wish to the continue the discussion here. Since, its on the same topic.
I have a already established blog which ranks on the 1st to 3rd page the moment I add my content in this particular niche.
I had a website made in the mid 2013. Where I had almost 150+ pages of unique content. But, never ranked for any keywords.
Now, I know that using this content on my new blog will be beneficial. Now, the question is:
1. Should I simply deindex my 2nd OLD website and migrate the content one by one to my new website.
2. Should I add rel=canonical tags and start pointing my new website?
3. Should I simply add 301 redirect for each page and wait for the redirects to get indexed?
Also, once I migrate the content on my new blog. Do you think I will have the advantage of using this content on my blog. Since, the content was already old. And this new blog always has new and fresh content with atleast 1500 words count each page.
-
I endorsed Ade's answer/comments, but I just want to point out something important that people frequently overlook. While rel=canonical and 301 redirects can have a similar impact on SEO, they're completely different for visitors. If a person comes to Site B and there's a canonical tag, they see Site B. Google credits that page to Site A and Site A shows up in search results. If a person comes to Site B and there's a 301-redirect, they go straight to Site A and never see Site B (done properly). These are two completely different experiences with completely different goals. So, set aside the SEO aspect for a minute and ask what you want to have happen to your customers.
-
I also agree with Ade - it's not about a boost so much as it is about a better user experience and clarification to the search engines of where to focus.
-
I agree with Ade, you should more focus on 1 website. Especially if the other one is just for canonical.
You may get two websites for local searchs in some very specific cases.
-
Hi.
Using rel=canonical won't give you any long-term SEO boost and neither will using a 301 redirect. Essentially all that the canonical link does is to tell Google that any relevance and authority for the page on the 2nd site should be attributed to the page on the 1st site. The 301 redirect does the same but it tells Google that you have permanently moved that page to the 1st site and it redirects the site visitor to the 1st site.
When you first set-up the canonical link there will be a brief period when Google will have crawlled and indexed the 1st site but it hasn't yet picked up the canonical link on the 2nd site giving you the situation where you have your pages 'double-indexed' or duplicated. This double indexing may give false boost whereby you have two bites of the cherry in the search results, this duplication is bad but it will resolve itself as Google re-crawls the 2nd site.
Have a look at what is happening with the number of pages in the index by running both of these searches through google as search queries:-
site:aerlawgroup.com
site:losangelescitycriminaldefenseattorney.comYou will see that the 2nd site has far fewer pages indexed and the pages that are there will gradually disappear until there are no pages in the index, all authority and relevance will have been passed to the 1st site.
-
Thank you for your feedback. I really appreciate it.
Honestly, I'm a little confused. Do I get more SEO boost from using Canonical or from 301 redirect? Or will the both provide the same SEO boost?
I used the Canonical tag and on Google Webmaster it doubled my indexed pages for the first site. This "doubling" of my indexed pages appeared to help my Google Rankings for the HIGHLY competitive keywords: "Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney".
What do you suggest I do, 301 or canonical, assuming I want to get the biggest SEO boost?
Thanks!
-
As long as you have the canonical links on every page of the 2nd site then you don't need to worry about any of the internal links but do you actually need to have the 2nd site? Why not just 301 redirect the 2nd site to the 1st site?
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
-
I've published my forst infographic and started outreach to get links. Should I use a canonical URL and if so how?
I've published my first infographic and started outreach to get links. I've also submitted it to several infographic directories. Should I use a canonical URL and if so how?
Link Building | | roadhaulageservices0 -
Reversing Canonical URLs?
A few months back, we set up canonical URLs on some pages with duplicate content to give some newer pages more link juice. Now, we need to do the opposite and give that same juice to some of the original pages. If we set up canonical URLs on the newer pages to point back to the original pages, are we losing the juice we've been building all along? Sorry for all this convoluted juice talk. Hopefully, my point is getting across here.
Link Building | | frankmassanova0 -
E-commerce canonicals on other sites
Hi, I have a client with a new e-commerce site which is poorly ranked. Besides his e-commerce, he offers his products in a local site which very similar to Amazon. The description and HTML structure of his products, is the same on both pages. What do you think? Should I add canonical tags to the Amazon-like site? Or do I just need to change both contents to avoid duplication?
Link Building | | guillermoga0 -
Do I need to use rel canonical in a blog?
I work at an ecommerce site and we are in the process setting up a blog. Do I need to use rel canonical what talking about a certain category? If I sell widgets and write a blog about widgets should I use that tag? Or is there something else I should do?
Link Building | | EcommerceSite0 -
Business directory and rel=canonical
If a business directory is using the rel=canonical tag on the first page of results for each section, is there any value from having a link on page 2 or 3 of these sections?
Link Building | | Silkstream0 -
Canonicals Url question
I manage a computer repair company website, www.callnerds.com One of our main marketing strategies are blog articles and press releases to newspappers. Because of this, we have a subfolder for the author of the newspaper articles who is becoming well known, and we wanted a place for people to connect with her personally. on this site callnerds.com/andrea We only publish articles that Andrea writes. Then on the blog we publish all of the articles, including articles that andrea writes, in addition to articles written by everyone else on our staff. i would like suggestions on wether a canonical link on the /andrea site should be used. the canonical link wold point to our blog. Her site is starting to get high quality links from newspapers and magazines, however all of the content on the site is duplicate content of the same article on our blog. Any thoughts?
Link Building | | NerdsOnCall0 -
Rel="canonical" or text link?
Lets say I have a commercial website that nobody will link to so I create a non commercial website with some awesome content that is highly linkable. I then get 30 - 40 quality links pointing to this site which I then either rel ="canonical" back to my main site to the page with the replica content or do I simply add a text link from the new site to the old sites homepage. Which would benefit my commercial site most? We are seeing the strategy of building a non commercial site for links becoming more and more popular. The second question is is it worth the effort for in effect one backlink?
Link Building | | fazza470 -
On-Page Report Rel Canonical and keyword density and backlinks...
Hey guys, 1- In the On-Page Report the "Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical" is not checked and it says <dl> <dt>Canonical URL "http://www.mydomain.com/"</dt> <dt>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.</dt> <dt>the domain points to the right page... Im not understading why its checked off..??? could it be because the canonical url has the ".com/" instead of just ".com" ???</dt> <dt>2- it also shows that the Total Keyword Usage for this Page = 33 , is this good or bad? too little or too much?</dt> <dt>3- Also when building backlinks should I include the ".com/" or ".com" ??</dt> <dt>Thank you in advance! </dt> </dl>
Link Building | | onyx8080