Two URL's for the same page
-
Hi, on our site we have two separate URL's for a page that has the same content. So, for example - 'www.domain.co.uk/stuff' and 'www.domain.co.uk/things/stuff' both have the same content on the page.
We currently rank high in search for 'www.domain.co.uk/things/stuff' for our targeted keyword, but there are numerous links on the site to www.domain.co.uk/stuff and also potentially inbound links to this page. Ideally we want just the www.domain.co.uk/things/stuff URL to be present on the site, what would be the best course of action to take?
Would a simple Canonical tag from the '/stuff' URL which points to the '/things/stuff' page be wise? If we were to scrap the '/stuff' URL totally and redirect it to the 'things/stuff' URL and change all our on site links, would this be beneficial and not harm our current ranking for '/things/stuff'?
We only want 1 URL for this page for numerous reasons (i.e, easier to track in Analytics), but I'm a bit cautious that changing the page that doesn't rank may have an affect on the page that does rank!
Thanks.
-
Hello Julian,
If you follow my advice above you should be fine.
-
Thank you for the long and detailed answer, theres some great advice there.
Basically both URL's have the right keywords in, it's just the URL was changed a while back so both still remain on the site. The newer URL is the one that ranks high on Google, the old one doesn't appear at all. There is no need for the old one, it serves no purpose that the new one doesn't. So surely getting rid of the old one won't affect the new ones ranking?
I see you put I should have full rankings back within 3-6 weeks, but there would be no reason why the URL that currently ranks high would lose any ranking surely?
Thanks again.
-
I'm going to weigh in here with a slightly different opinion. I wouldn't just go with whichever one ranks best because I think he can do this without long-term damage to rankings and it would be best to go with whichever one he wants from a usability/branding perspective barring any major technological issues/costs.
Though he didn't say why, he did say "Ideally we want just the www.domain.co.uk/things/stuff URL to be present on the site..." and I'm going to assume they have reasons for this.
In that case, I'd follow this course of action:
#1 Apply a rel = "canonical" tag to both pages and reference the /things/stuff URL as canonical. Make this an absolute path (i.e. include http://www.domain.com)
#2 While waiting for search engines to see this tag go ahead and begin updating all internal links to /stuff/* and point them to /things/stuff* instead. You may need to do some mod URL rewrites to change the URLs used within the system. The point here is to change everything you can instead of relying on the redirects as a band-aid for a problem you can mostly fix.
#2.5 Do not change the links in the XML sitemap yet. You want search engines to have a crawl-path to the old URLs for awhile longer so they can find their way back to the page and see the redirect faster than they would by relying on their database of URLs to randomly crawl.
#3 Because there may be external links you do not have the ability to update, apply the 301 redirect from /stuff/* URLs to the counterpart /things/stuff* URLs.
#3.5 Resubmit the old XML sitemap. Google may reject it because of the redirects, but it does usually spark a fresh crawl of the site.
#4 Update the XML sitemap and submit with the new URLs.
#5 Monitor closely. Keep an eye on new 404 errors, as you may have to add additional redirects that fell through the cracks. Crawl the site with Screaming Frog, looking for redirect loops, redirect chains, 301s that could be updated to link directly to the destination, 404 errors, 500 errors, non-canonical URLs... Keep an eye on rankings and traffic from search. If all went well you should have full rankings back within 3-6 weeks. If you do not have it back by 6 weeks you may have a technical issue to deal with that is out of the norm, in my experience. At that point I'd start taking a close look at log files with Splunk.
Note: In this case I would NOT use Google's "URL Removal Tool" as it could possibly cause some of the external links from the URL you're removing to move over via the redirect to the new URL. The 301 and the fact that you are updating all internal links (and external links you have direct control of) to the new URL should get the old one out of the index in due time.
Note: This advice is for moving from one directory to another with the exact same page and structure on the same domain. There are important differences between that and moving to a new domain, or redirecting to content that isn't an exact replica of that on the original URL.
-
Since you have links pointing at them both, I would just redirect the lower ranking one to the higher ranking one. 301
The one that ranks better woud be the one I would keep. Sometimes redirects and url changes can take a while for search engines to find, even if you fetch as Google.
-
Hi,
it wouldn't harm the page no, having said that for site navigation purposes it might be a bit confusing having 301 redirects all over the place instead of the tag. It may help but there is never a guarantee essentially the canonical tag works the same as a 301 for link juice so you can always give that a go first and if nothing happens then 301 it but its up to you.
It comes down the the user would it benefit the user 301 or would it add to page load times or get confusing? If its a permanent site resign go for it though.
it is just telling search engines "this (the page) is the new home/location of the page you're looking for" then they will update their records to reflect it - a bit like when you move house and tell the postman you moved.
Good luck!
-
Thanks for your reply Chris. The thing is I don't need / want the page that isn't ranking in Google anymore, it serves no purpose other than to confuse things when looking at the Analytics! If I were to do a redirect from the page that doesn't rank to the page that does, that wouldn't harm the page that does rank would it?
The page that doesn't rank is linked to from the main navigation, but the page that does rank isn't! Would I be right in thinking a redirect may actually help the page that does rank, even more?
Thanks again.
-
Hi there,
the canonical sounds perfect! Personally I tend to put it on the link closer to the homepage but its preference really logically make the page that's stronger to start with the "original". No need to scrap, the tag will let you keep your layout but give the SEO benefit to just one page.
in short canonical is the perfect match for your needs!
More info - https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139066?hl=en
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
-
Wordpress 'Hide Title' Feature, does this help shorten title length
Im wondering if anyone with some Wordpress experience can help me. I am using Yoast to create my page titles, but yet Moz tells me that my page titles including my actual page title tag which is 'dumfries wedding photography | Hemera Visuals' by clicking on the 'hide title' feature in wordpress will this in turn stop wordpress from automatically adding my page title and therfor bring my title length down drastically? And if so will I have to wait till google next crawls my page to see if this works? Kind Regards Cameron.
On-Page Optimization | | hemeravisuals120 -
URL Structure Category Pages -Current Moz Friday-
Hello,
On-Page Optimization | | _Heiko_
regarding #15 of the last moz friday I have a question: http://moz.com/blog/15-seo-best-practices-for-structuring-urls What would you prefer if the lenght of the URL will be still under 60 characters and you have an example like this: Let's call it a specific page in a category. As I like the old shoe examples: You have a page about red shoes in your shoe category. Which URL would you prefer: a) www.mydomain.com/shoes/red-shoe b) www.mydomain.com/shoes/red Personally I would prefer a) or would you already consider this as spammy? My real example is not that trivial like the shoe example and the categories will be in plural and the specific pages always in singular (like in the example shoes vs shoe). c) would be to put it independently from the side structure on www.mydomain.com/red-shoe - but personally I have the experience that a) or b) will help the rankings of the category page if you have the specific pages in the same subfolder. What's your opinion on this?1 -
Googlebot indexing URL's with ? queries in them. Is this Panda duplicate content?
I feel like I'm being damaged by Panda because of duplicate content as I have seen the Googlebot on my site indexing hundreds of URL's with ?fsdgsgs strings after the .html. They were beign generated by an add-on filtering module on my store, which I have since turned off. Googlebot is still indexing them hours later. At a loss what to do. Since Panda, I have lost a couple of dozen #1 rankings that I've held for months on end and had one drop over 100 positions.
On-Page Optimization | | sparrowdog0 -
Duplicate Content for Men's and Women's Version of Site
So, we're a service where you can book different hairdressing services from a number of different salons (site being worked on). We're doing both a male and female version of the site on the same domain which users are can select between on the homepage. The differences are largely cosmetic (allowing the designers to be more creative and have a bit of fun and to also have dedicated male grooming landing pages), but I was wondering about duplicate pages. While most of the pages on each version of the site will be unique (i.e. [male service] in [location] vs [female service] in [location] with the female taking precedent when there are duplicates), what should we do about the likes of the "About" page? Pages like this would both be unique in wording but essentially offer the same information and does it make sense to to index two different "About" pages, even if the titles vary? My question is whether, for these duplicate pages, you would set the more popular one as the preferred version canonically, leave them both to be indexed or noindex the lesser version entirely? Hope this makes sense, thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | LeahHutcheon0 -
What's the best way to handle crawling of photo gallery?
When you have a photo gallery with many search filters and loads and loads of pages, is it best to block all the filters and use google's pagination code? Ex: http://photo.net/gallery/photocritique/filter This site has pages for many different queries. While the page titles are unique, the pages are showing duplicated content.
On-Page Optimization | | cakelady0 -
Reducing the site's header to get more content Above the Fold
The user bizzer posted the following question on the post (http://www.seomoz.org/blog/guide-to-ads😞 "I've got my above the fold area very light on advertising since Panda. But reading #4 about the "template" makes me wonder if I should go further and reduce the height of my header area and maybe even remove one of my two sidebars, so as to increase the content-to-template ratio above the fold. Make sense?" What do you think?
On-Page Optimization | | rpedri0 -
Would adding a line break tag into the product name affect SEO ranking and Google's ability to read the entire title?
Our client would like to include a link break so that part of the product name always showed up on a second line. Would this affect how Google bots crawl the product name? Would it also affect how Google would show the product name in a search result page? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | BrandLabs0 -
Keyword in URL
Hi everyone, I've heard many times that keyword prominence in url have a good impact for on-page optimization, even in SEOmoz it is one of the on-page factors. But what if i put keyword in URL then some of the page weight will be targeted to the page in the URL. Which in my vision makes only a negative impact. For ex. Targeted page <a>with keyword "buy car in NY" has a link with anchor text "buy car in NY" pointing on page **, so some weight from A will be transferred to B. Also I think this subject cover a cross linking, so I would like to know, what is the right way of doing cross linking and does it still brings any impact on keyword rankings in SERP.**</a> <a>**Good answer will be appreciated. Cheers, Russel**</a>
On-Page Optimization | | smokin_ace0