Lots of dublicate titles and pages on search page
-
I own a paiting website with a lot of searchable paintings.
The "search paintings" feature creates tons of dublicate pages and titles.
See here:
http://www.maleribasen.dk/soegmaleri.aspI guess the problem is, that the URL can actually be different and still return the same content.
First time you click the "Search paintings" the URL will shown as above. But as soon as users
begin to definere they search to the left and use the "Search button" the top URL changes.So, depending on how the top URL looks different results are shown. This is pretty standard in searches.
But it returns tons of dublicate pages and titles.
How, do you guys cope with that?
Is there a clever way to use ref="cannonical" or some other smart way to avoid this?
/Kasper
-
Yes, in an addition to the canonical tag you will need to setup the redirects. But am not sure how you would do that on microsoft server.
-
Ok, can u explain a bit more? I'm a programmer myself, so I might do it myself.
But i'm guessing that i need to install something on webserver to create those urls, and then use a permanent 301 redirect on the old urls to the new ones?
-
Your webmaster should as the tag for you.. your programmer would be able to handle the issue with the friendly URL's but that's a complicated process because they should redirect the old pages to the new...
-
Thanks for your answer. So, what do you recommend? I have access to programmers, so I can make the changes that needs to be done. Just not sure how to do it.
-
Yes you could use a canonical tag for every single page you have (which you have thousands as I discovered).
The other issue that you are facing is that your URL's are not user friendly. If you had some friendly URL's it would be easier for Google to understand your pages.
As for the canonical tag please use a sample as the below:
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 adding main site name to the title tags of pages in the sub folders: How to handle?
Hi community, Ours is a WP hosted website. We have given our site title which reflects across all the website page title suffix. Like "Moz SEO" will be default at the title for pages like "Local SEO - Moz SEO". We have given different page title suffix to our sub-folders' pages like blog and help guides. For blog we have given "Moz blog" as title tag suffix which was working fine. But Google suddenly started showing main website's title as suffix in pages of sub folders. Ex blog: "How to rank better - Moz blog - Moz SEO". Here we can see "Moz SEO" has been added which is not required. How to handle this? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Is it bad from an SEO perspective that cached AMP pages are hosted on domains other than the original publisher's?
Hello Moz, I am thinking about starting to utilize AMP for some of my website. I've been researching this AMP situation for the better part of a year and I am still unclear on a few things. What I am primarily concerned with in terms of AMP and SEO is whether or not the original publisher gets credit for the traffic to a cached AMP page that is hosted elsewhere. I can see the possible issues with this from an SEO perspective and I am pretty sure I have read about how SEOs are unhappy about this particular aspect of AMP in other places. On the AMP project FAQ page you can find this, but there is very little explanation: "Do publishers receive credit for the traffic from a measurement perspective?
Algorithm Updates | | Brian_Dowd
Yes, an AMP file is the same as the rest of your site – this space is the publisher’s canvas." So, let's say you have an AMP page on your website example.com:
example.com/amp_document.html And a cached copy is served with a URL format similar to this: https://google.com/amp/example.com/amp_document.html Then how does the original publisher get the credit for the traffic? Is it because there is a canonical tag from the AMP version to the original HTML version? Also, while I am at it, how does an AMP page actually get into Google's AMP Cache (or any other cache)? Does Google crawl the original HTML page, find the AMP version and then just decide to cache it from there? Are there any other issues with this that I should be aware of? Thanks0 -
AMP pages - should we be creating AMP versions of all site pages?
Hi all, Just wondering what people's opinions are on AMP pages - having seen the Google demo of how AMP pages will be given visibility on page one of Google for news-based content, do you think it is worth considering creating AMP versions of all pages, ready for when Google expands its inclusion of these super-fast pages?
Algorithm Updates | | A_Q1 -
Canonicalization on more than one page?
is it proper to "canocalize" more than one page in a site? Or should it only be on the home page? eg: http://www.sundayschoolnetwork.com">
Algorithm Updates | | sakeith0 -
New Search Engine.... Vanoogle.com
I'd like to see google start a new search engine. They might call it Vanoogle.com (Vanilla Google). This search engine would not be stinked up with social data, freshness inclusions, crap from my last query, skewed based upon my IP, warped because of my browser, targeted because of my cookies, no personalization, no image results, product results, none of that stuff. Ads are OK if labeled. I just want a plain vanilla search. Something that I know is "clean". Just like the good olde days. Millions of people will start using it right away. 🙂 Would you use Vanoogle.com?
Algorithm Updates | | EGOL2 -
Test contet/pages indexed by search engines
During the web development stages of our Joomla CMS website, we have managed to get our site indexed for totally irrelevant test pages mainly to do with Joomla and some other equally irrelevant test content. How damaging is this to our domain from an SEO prospective and is there something we can do about it? When we do a site:domain.com search we see hundreds of testpages with test/irrelevant meta tags etc.
Algorithm Updates | | Fuad_YK0 -
Difference in which pages Google is ranking?
Over the past two weeks I've noticed that Google has decided to change which pages on our site rank for specific keywords. The thing is, this is for keywords that the homepage was already ranking for. Due to our workload, we've made no changes to the site, and I'm not tracking any additional backlinks. Certainly there are no new deep links to these pages. In SEOmoz dashboard (and via tools/manual checking with a proxy) of the 24 terms we have first page ranking for, 9 of them are marked "new to top 50". These are terms we were already ranking for. Google just appears to have switched out the homepage for other pages. I've noticed this across a couple of client sites, too, though none to the extent that I'm seeing on our own. Certainly this isn't a bad thing, as the deeper pages ranking means that they're landing on the content they want first, and I can work to up the conversion rates. It's just caught me by surprise. Anyone else noticing similar changes?
Algorithm Updates | | BedeFahey1 -
Google +1 link on Domain or Page?
Since its release, I've seen Google +1 being used across an entire domain but only reference the root href in the code snippet. At the same time, you see other sites use +1 more naturally with the button being specific to the page you're on. What's your take on this? To clarfiy, do you add: or .. on each page.
Algorithm Updates | | noeltock0