Is it possible to "undo" canonical tags as unique content is created?
-
We will soon be launching an education site that teaches people how to drive (not really the topic, but it will do). We plan on being content rich and have plans to expand into several "schools" of driving. Currently, content falls into a number of categories, for example rules of the road, shifting gears, safety, etc. We are going to group content into general categories that apply broadly, and then into "schools" where the content is meant to be consumed in a specific order.
So, for example, some URLs in general categories may be:
Then, schools will be available for specific types of vehicles. For example,
We will provide lessons at the school level, and in the general categories. This is where it gets tricky. If people are looking for general content, then we want them to find pages in the general categories (for example, drivingschool.com/rules-of-the-road/traffic-signs). However, we have very similar content within each of the schools (for example, drivingschool.com/motorbikes/rules-of-the-road/traffic-signs).
As you could imagine, sometimes the content is very unique between the various schools and the general category (such as in shifting), but often it is very similar or even nearly duplicate (as in the example above). The problem is that in the schools we want to say at the end of the lesson, "after this lesson, take the next lesson about speed limits for motorcycles" so there is a very logical click-path through the school. Unfortunately this creates potential duplicate content issues.
The best solution I've come up with is to include a canonical tag (pointing to the general version of the page) whenever there is content that is virtually identical. There will be cases though where we adjust the content "down the road"
to be more unique and more specific for the school. At that time we'd want to remove the canonical tag.
So two questions:
- Does anyone have any better ideas of how to handle this duplicate content?
- If we implement canonical tags now, and in 6 months update content to be more school-specific, will "undoing" the canonical tag (and even adding a self-referential tag) work for SEO?
I really hope someone has some insight into this!
Many thanks (in advance).
-
I'd agree with Sanket on (1) - while, not a huge fan of creating new URLs for near duplicates (there may be some other ways, like dynamically modifying the content), canonical tags are definitely your best bet here if you need those unique URLs.
I'll add a caveat on (2), though. Sometimes, canonical tags can "stick" a bit longer than you'd like, and Google may not re-index quickly. Adding a self-referential canonical tag does seem to help, anecdotally. What I'd also do is put those URLs back in your XML sitemap once they're unique (I'd leave them out while they're duplicates) - that can spur Google to reindex, and the self-referential tag can tell them to cancel the previous directive. Otherwise, they sometimes act like the old canonical is still in place.
-
Hi Jessica,
1. Implementation on canonical tag is the best solution in your case
2. Google doesn't index URLs in which you have implemented canonical tag, so I don't think you have to worry about it. After six month when you remove canonical tag I think you will get little boost in ranking as you have updated the page with unique content.
Hope this help you out...
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
-
Backlink "class=X-hidden-focus"
Is anyone familiar with class=X-hidden-focus? Do these links still contain link juice or are they similar to no follow?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Colemckeon0 -
Best Way to Create SEO Content for Multiple, International Websites
I have a client that has multiple websites for providing to other countries. For instance, they have a .com website for the US (abccompany.com), a .co.uk website for the UK (abccompany.co.uk), a .de website for Germany (abccompany.de), and so on. The have websites for the Netherlands, France, and even China. These all act as separate websites. They have their own addresses, their own content (some duplicated but translated), their own pricing, their own Domain Authority, backlinks, etc. Right now, I write content for the US site. The goal is to write content for long and medium tail keywords. However, the UK site is interested in having myself write content for them as well. The issue I'm having is how can I differentiate the content? And what is the best way to target content for each country? Does it make sense to write separate content for each website to target results in that country? The .com site will still show up in UK web results still fairly high. Does it make sense to just duplicate the content but in a different language or for the specific audience in that country? I guess the biggest question I'm asking is, what is the best way of creating content for multiples countries' search results? I don't want the different websites to compete with each other in a sense nor do I want to spend extra time trying to rank content for multiple sites when I could just focus on trying to rank one for all countries. Any help is appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cody1090 -
Heading Tags & Content Count
Hi everyone I am looking into this page on our site http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/sack-trucks Just comparing it against competitors in SEMRush, the tool shows a wordcount of this page for over 4089 words, compared with http://www.wickes.co.uk/Wickes-Green-General-Purpose-Sack-Truck-200kg/p/500302 which only has 2658 - it has a lot more written content than our page - where is this word count coming from? Also looking at the same page on our site Woorank suggests we have the word 'sack truck' in the h1 and title too many times - it's only there once, but its this showing because its an exact match keyword? I'm just wondering if there is something wrong with the html or how the page is being crawed?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Strange 404s in GWT - "Linked From" pages that never existed
I’m having an issue with Google Webmaster Tools saying there are 404 errors on my site. When I look into my “Not Found” errors I see URLs like this one: Real-Estate-1/Rentals-Wanted-228/Myrtle-Beach-202/subcatsubc/ When I click on that and go to the “Linked From” tab, GWT says the page is being linked from http://www.myrtlebeach.com/Real-Estate-1/Rentals-Wanted-228/Myrtle-Beach-202/subcatsubc/ The problem here is that page has never existed on myrtlebeach.com, making it impossible for anything to be “linked from” that page. Many more strange URLs like this one are also showing as 404 errors. All of these contain “subcatsubc” somewhere in the URL. My Question: If that page has never existed on myrtlebeach.com, how is it possible to be linking to itself and causing a 404?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Fuel0 -
Webmaster Tools "Not found" errors after sitemap update
Hello Mozzers - I found a sitemap with loads of URL errors on it (none of the URLs on sitemap actually existed) so I went ahead and updated sitemap - now I'm seeing a spike in "not found" errors in WMT - is this normal / anything to worry about when you significantly change a sitemap. I've never replaced every URL on a sitemap before! L
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
What does this kind of rel="canonical" mean?
It looks like our CMS may not be configured correctly as there is an empty section in the rel="canonical" rel="canonical" href="{page_uri}" /> Will having the above meta tag be harmful to our SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | voicesdotcom0 -
Should we use the rel-canonical tag?
We have a secure version of our site, as we often gather sensitive business information from our clients. Our https pages have been indexed as well as our http version. Could it still be a problem to have an http and an https version of our site indexed by Google? Is this seen as being a duplicate site? If so can this be resolved with a rel=canonical tag pointing to the http version? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | annieplaskett1 -
Does "Noindex" lead to Loss of Link Equity?
Our company has two websites with about 8,000 duplicate articles between them. Yep, 8,000 articles were posted on both sites over the past few years. This is the definition of cross-domain duplicate content. Plan A is to set all of the articles to "noindex,follow" on the site that we care less about (site B). We are not redirecting since we want to keep the content on that site for on-site traffic to discover. If we do set them to "noindex," my concern is that we'll lose massive amounts of link equity acquired over time...and thus lose domain authority...thus overall site rankability. Does Google treat pages changed to "noindex" the same as 404 pages? If so, then I imagine we would lose massive link equity. Plan B is to just wait it out since we're migrating site B to site A in 6-9 months, and hope that our more important site (site A) doesn't get a Panda penalty in the meantime. Thoughts on the better plan?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | M_D_Golden_Peak0