Duplicate title tags due to lightbox use
-
I am looking at a site and am pulling up duplicate title tags because of their lightbox use so...
So they have a page: http://www.website.com/page
and then a duplicate of that page: http://www.website.com/page?width=500&height=600
on a huge number of pages (using Drupal)...
that kind of thing - what would be the best / cleanest solution?
-
Hi there,
IMO the two pages are near duplicates and I have seen pages that have been indexed in such cases (on one of our own projects). Then we have taken in consideration the canonical, and issue was solved. This is why I have recommended it, but I am opened to other solutions also.
Gr., Keszi
-
Keszi is that really necessary? As a programmer I find it difficult to believe that Google would require such a ridiculous thing. Any url can have a query string appended and then a link built to that query url+query string. Query strings simply add a ? then a key=value pair to the url. If this were necessary I could go to my competitors website and just add a query string and build a bunch of backlinks to it. Google would then consider all their website duplicate content because the website root exists and a website root version with a query string on the same page.
What I am getting at is that query strings don't require such action. Something on the client side would never require server side action by any third party (google or otherwise). It would basically be to easily manipulated.
However, there are times that the website uses valid query strings to sort/filter or even deliver content (like modern CMS joomla, drupal, wordpress). When you query a database with a query string normally there is significant code that handles the URL and makes it a url in it's own right. You don't see ?p=23. You see a url friendly version.
If your website has query strings that sort/filter and the site is not sophisticated enough to manipulate those query strings with .htaccess to deliver SEO friendly urls I would suggest reading/utilizing this google page/tool.
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/6080548?hl=en
This explains this EXACT issue. When websites expose query strings that enable the site to sort/filter.
-
Hi Luke,
I would implement a canonical in any situation where there can be parameters in the url. This way telling any search engine to only consider one (the original) version of that page.
Gr., Keszi
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
-
Why is our noindex tag not working?
Hi, I have the following page where we've implemented a no index tag. But when we run this page in screaming frog or this tool here to verify the noidex is present and functioning, it shows that it's not. But if you view the source of the page, the code is present in the head tag. And unfortunately we've seen instances where Google is indexing pages we've noindexed. Any thoughts on the example above or why this is happening in Google? Eddy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | eddys_kap0 -
No content using Fetch
Wooah, this one makes me feel a bit nervous. The cache version of the site homepage shows all the text, but I understand that is the html code constructed by the browser. So I get that. If I Google some of the content it is there in the index and the cache version is yesterday. If I Fetch and Render in GWT then none of the content is available in the preview - neither Googlebot or visitor view. The whole preview is just the menu, a holding image for a video and a tag line for it. There are no reports of blocked resources apart from a Wistia URL. How can I decipher what is blocking Google if it does not report any problems? The CSS is visible for reference to, for example, <section class="text-within-lines big-text narrow"> class="data"> some content... Ranking is a real issue, in part by a poorly functioning main menu. But i'm really concerned with what is happening with the render.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MickEdwards0 -
Duplicate title tags due to ?_escaped_fragment_=
Duplicate title tags due to /?escaped_fragment= in the serps, it look like this http://www.site.com/25621/post-name/#! http://www.site.com/25621/post-name/ Does anyone know what the best fix is for this and does this affect the sites performance. Regards T
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Taiger0 -
Review site using canonical tag in a puzzling way.
Have just been looking at a review site and they're using the canonical tag very strangely, to me. For example, they may have several pages of reviews of the same item - they use the canonical tag on page 2/3/4 to point back at page 1 - and yet there is no duplication between the pages. Any idea why they might be doing this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Risk Using "Nofollow" tag
I have a lot of categories (like e-commerce sites) and many have page 1 - 50 for each category (view all not possible). Lots of the content on these pages are present across the web on other websites (duplicate stuff). I have added quality unique content to page 1 and added "noindex, follow" to page 2-50 and rel=next prev tags to the pages. Questions: By including the "follow" part, Google will read content and links on pages 2-50 and they may think "we have seen this stuff across the web….low quality content and though we see a noindex tag, we will consider even page 1 thin content, because we are able to read pages 2-50 and see the thin content." So even though I have "noindex, follow" the 'follow' part causes the issue (in that Google feels it is a lot of low quality content) - is this possible and if I had added "nofollow" instead that may solve the issue and page 1 would increase chance of looking more unique? Why don't I add "noindex, nofollow" to page 2 - 50? In this way I ensure Google does not read the content on page 2 - 50 and my site may come across as more unique than if it had the "follow" tag. I do understand that in such case (with nofollow tag on page 2-50) there is no link juice flowing from pages 2 - 50 to the main pages (assuming there are breadcrumbs or other links to the indexed pages), but I consider this minimal value from an SEO perspective. I have heard using "follow" is generally lower risk than "nofollow" - does this mean a website with a lot of "noindex, nofollow" tags may hurt the indexed pages because it comes across as a site Google can't trust since 95% of pages have such "noindex, nofollow" tag? I would like to understand what "risk" factors there may be. thank you very much
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | khi50 -
GWT URL Removal Tool Risky to Use for Duplicate Pages?
I was planning to remove lots of URL's via GWT that are highly duplicate alike pages (similar pages exist on other websites across the web). However, this Google article had me a bit concerned: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/1269119?hl=en I already have "noindex, follow" on the pages I want to remove from the index, but Google seems to take ages to remove pages from index, which appear to drag down unique content pages from my site.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | khi50 -
Two pages on same domain - Is this a proper use of the canonical tag?
I have a domain with two pages in question--one is an article with 2,000 words and the other is a FAQ with 300 words. The 300 word FAQ is copied, word-for-word and pasted inside of the 2,000 word article. Would it be a proper use of the canonical tag to point the smaller, 300 word FAQ at the 2,000 word article? Since the 300 word article is identical to a portion of the 2,000 word article, will Google see this as duplicate content? Thanks in advance for any helpful insight.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | andrewv0 -
How to use the information
I've just signed up and now I want to start using all the information that your site is providing. How do I go about it? I know how to get to the 'back end' of my site, Joomla (CMS) and can alter all the information. I just need to know how to implement all the data you give me. Sorry, but I am new to this.....
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Aim4fun0