Cross Domain Rel Canonical tags vs. Rel Canonical Tags for internal webpages
-
Today I noticed that one of my colleagues was pointing rel canonical tags to a third party domain on a few specific pages on a client's website. This was a standard rel canonical tag that was written
Up to this point I haven't seen too many webmasters point a rel canonical to a third party domain. However after doing some reading in the Google Webmaster Tools blog I realized that cross domain rel canonicals are indeed a viable strategy to avoid duplicate content.
My question is this; should rel canonical tags be written the same way when dealing with internal duplicate content vs. external duplicate content? Would a rel=author tag be more appropriate when addressing 3rd party website duplicate content issues?
Any feedback would be appreciated.
-
Excellent response. Thanks Michael.
-
Rel=canonical pointing to a different domain is essentially telling Google "here's the original copy of this article".
That's fine if you choose to reprint just the occasional bit of content from somewhere else.
It's also a fine strategy to use in a white-label system, where you might have the same content published across a number of sites, all branded differently.
But you want to use this sparingly. If you've got a site with 1000 pages, and 750 of those pages are rel=canonicalled back to another domain, essentially you're telling Google that most of your website is just republished stuff that somebody else wrote. That's not going to be a good signal for Google of the likely quality of the site in general.
If you're in a situation where you really do need to publish a lot of pages on multiple sites, and all of the sites do need to be found in search for SOME terms, then for those duplicated pages, I'd noindex them on the "copy" sites, so that in the example above, Google would only see and index 250 pages, all of which would be original content.
-
I have used rel=canonical on a few pages of content that were published on two of my websites. T
-
No, rel="canonical" is the same internally or cross-domain. You are just telling Google which copy of that content to serve, wherever it is. (And rel="author" is no longer used by Google to show authorship in results nor is it tracking data from content using that markup. http://searchengineland.com/goodbye-google-authorship-201975 https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JohnMueller/posts/HZf3KDP1Dm8 )
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
-
This one is complicated... canonicals, href lang tags and no index
Bear with me, this is complicated (I REALLY hope one of you comes along and says, no it isn't!) Scenario A client has multiple english pages, as they have a unique product offering in AUS, US, UK, NZ and also have a global site in english. Obviously there is a lot of duplicate content and they have the relevant href lang tags set-up to help Google untangle what should be ranked where. They also have rel-canonical on each page. I've set-up search console for each of the folder structures, i.e. en-us, en-gb, en-au and so on. They have an optimised page for one of their primary keywords, which ranks nowhere for this exact keyword, but this page DOES rank for 40 similar keywords. For the exact keyword, they rank 52nd, and frustratingly, it's the homepage that ranks. We know the correct page is ranking and is indexed because search console tells us so and we see the exact page appear in SERPs for the other 40 keywords. When I look at the en-us site in Search Console, it tells me that the home page is not being indexed, because a rel canonical tag is prioritising an alternative page (probably the global site) - however, the en-us homepage is showing up in rankings for a lot of their important keywords. The site has been live for 6 months and the optimised page for about 3 months. Questions 1. If search console is saying the homepage is not ranking, how is it showing up in SERPs?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Algorhythm_jT
2. Why is the homepage ranking for this important keyword, when there is virtually no mention of the keyword versus the page that is almost perfect according to Moz's on-page grader?
3. Do you need href lang tags AND rel canonical on a page?
4. How long before a new page that is optimised for a keyword take to replace (and hopefully surpass) the homepage?
5. If the US is the most important market, should we guide Google to that fact using rel-canonical? Really appreciate your feedback, hivemind. Thanks0 -
Relationship Between Cross-Domain Canonical Versions and Backlinks
Hi All, I am looking for some community insight on how backlinks on the different versions of a canonical page are handled for ranking purposes. Suppose that I have two versions of the same page on two different domains: 1. https://www.mysite.com/tshirts <--Canonical Version 2. https://www.mywebsite.com/tshirts <--Non-Canonical Version that points to page #1 Also consider a third domain that is being linked to from the article. Since it is identical content, both pages contain the same outbound links to this page: 3. https://www.myclothing.com I am wondering how the backlink authority transfer is handled for page number two. Since it has the canonical tag pointing to page 1, only page 1 should be considered for indexing/ranking purposes as a whole page. However, my question relates to what happens to backlink flow since both #1 and #2 above contain links to site #3. In the above example, would both mysite.com and mywebsite.com be passing a backlink to myclothing .com, or would it only be the first domain (www.mysite.com) passing link authority since it is marked as the canonical for ranking purposes. Thanks for any thoughts!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Evan_Wright0 -
Best Practice Approaches to Canonicals vs. Indexing in Google Sitemap vs. No Follow Tags
Hi There, I am working on the following website: https://wave.com.au/ I have become aware that there are different pages that are competing for the same keywords. For example, I just started to update a core, category page - Anaesthetics (https://wave.com.au/job-specialties/anaesthetics/) to focus mainly around the keywords ‘Anaesthetist Jobs’. But I have recognized that there are ongoing landing pages that contain pretty similar content: https://wave.com.au/anaesthetists/ https://wave.com.au/asa/ We want to direct organic traffic to our core pages e.g. (https://wave.com.au/job-specialties/anaesthetics/). This then leads me to have to deal with the duplicate pages with either a canonical link (content manageable) or maybe alternatively adding a no-follow tag or updating the robots.txt. Our resident developer also suggested that it might be good to use Google Index in the sitemap to tell Google that these are of less value? What is the best approach? Should I add a canonical link to the landing pages pointing it to the category page? Or alternatively, should I use the Google Index? Or even another approach? Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Wavelength_International0 -
Internal Clicks and CTR. Is REL=canonical better than Noindex in this case?
I currently have a search facility in a website that noindexes the search results which is ok. But when you click one of the results it takes you to a product which is noindexes as it has URL params. e.g. https://www.visitliverpool.com/accommodation/albion-guest-house-p305431?bookurl=%2Fbook-online%3Fstage%3Dunitsel%26isostartdate%3D2017-10-31%26nights%3D1%26roomReq_1_adults%3D1%26NumRoomReqs%3D1%26fuzzy%3D0%26product%3D305431 The product also exists as this which is indexed : - https://www.visitliverpool.com/accommodation/albion-guest-house-p305431 Should I canonicalise is this instance instead of no index? Does CTR apply to internal links? i.e. Does search console consider internal clicks? Are internal clicks a ranking factor?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Andrew-SEO0 -
Canonical URL's For Two Domains
We have two websites, one we use for Google PPC (website 1) and one (website 2) we use for everything else. The reason is we are in an industry that Google Adwords doesn't like, so we built a whole other website that removes the product descriptions as Google Adwords doesn't approve of many of them (nutrition). Right now we have that Google Adwords approved website (website 1) no-index/no-follow because we didn't want to run into potential duplicate content issues in free search, but the issue is we can't submit it to Google Shopping...as they require it to be indexable. Do you think removing the no-index/no-follow from that website 1 and adding canonical URL's pointing to website 2 would resolve this issue (being able to submit it to Google Shopping) and not cause any problems with duplicate content? I was thinking of adding the canonical tag to all pages of website 1 and point it to website 2. Does that make sense? Do you think that would work?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vetofunk0 -
Rel Canonical for HTTP and HTTPS pages
My website has a login that has HTTPS pages. If the visitors doesn't log in they are given an HTTP page that is similar, but slightly different. Should I sure a Rel Canonical for these similar pages and how should that be set up? HTTP to HTTPS version or the other way around? Thank you, Joey
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JoeyGedgaud1 -
Canonical tags and GA tracking on premium sub-domain?
Hello! I'm launching a premium service on my site that will deliver two fairly distinct user experiences, but with nearly identical page content across the two. I'm thinking of placing the "upgraded" version on a subdomain, e.g. www.mysite.com, premium.mysite.com. Simple enough. I've run into two obstacles, however: -I don't want the premium site crawled separately, so I'd like to use canonical tags to pull all premium.* back to their www.* parents. --How different can page content be before canonical tags backfire? --Is there any other danger in using canonicals across subdomains like this? -Less importantly: with Google Analytics, if I track against the subdomain my visits will split naturally, and it should generate a second cookie for a new registrant who crosses subdomains. I could also use a visitor-level custom var. Good idea? Bad idea? Thanks! -m
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | grumbles0
