What is the difference between rel canonical and 301's?
-
Hi Guys
I have been told a few times to add the rel canonical tag to my category pages - however every category page actually is different from the other - besides the listings that I have for my staff on each pages. Some of them specialise in areas that cross over in other areas - but over really if I'm re directing for eg: Psychic Readings over to Love and Relationships because 5 of my staff members are in both categories - the actual delivering of content and in depth of the actual category which skills are provided at different levels don't justify me creating a rel tag from Psychic Readings over to Love and Relationships just because i have 5 staff members listed under both categories.
Tell me have I got this right or completely wrong?
Here is an eg: Psychic Readings category https://www.zenory.com/psychic-readings
And love and relationships category - https://www.zenory.com/love-relationships
Hope this makes sense - I really look forward to your guys feedback!
Cheers
-
Understand what you mean - to be very honest I don't think that this content snippet is generating duplicate content.
However, I don't really understand the mechanism:
https://www.zenory.com/horoscopes/taurus/day -> I would expect to find the daily horoscope for Taurus - when I click on Capricorn I would expect to go to https://www.zenory.com/horoscopes/capricorn/day - however I remain on the same page & the horoscope is shown in a lightbox. I would rather put it on a separate page (if all horoscopes of all signs are present in the HTML of one sign these pages become quite similar when you look at the source code.
Sounds a bit confusing, but I hope you get what I mean.rgds,
Dirk
-
Hi Dirk
I wanted to ask you another question with regard to this.
I have horoscope pages that have just been published today.
We offer daily horoscope for each star sign (12) these are unique and different each day for each star sign, however there is a weekend love section at the bottom of each page for each star sign that is the same for the whole week.
https://www.zenory.com/horoscopes/taurus/day
https://www.zenory.com/horoscopes/aries/day
Above will show you an example of a couple of the daily horoscopes, you can see the weekend love is different - however it will be the same for the same star sign tomorrow - you can't see these as we have only published and released these today. So you will be able to tell the difference when tomorrows one is published, but hopefully I have explained myself well here.
So my question will be - half the content on a single page will be duplicate content: Besides the new daily horoscope entry. I'm wondering if I need to add canonical tags or if I should create a separate page for the weekend love horoscope of each star sign.
I hope this makes sense!
Thanks again Dirk!
-
That answers my question Dirk, thank you again!!!
-
For the examples you gave I would certainly not use a 301 or use a canonical tag. The content is unique - and only a relatively small part is common (the list)
To explain the difference:
A canonical tag is used if you have pages that are identical (or almost identical) and which are accessible under different url's. A good example is an e-commerce site with a list of articles like mysite.com/umbrellas - if by sorting the products the url is changing like mysite.com/umbrellas&sort=high it's best to put a canonical so that google will not index all the variations. If you use a canonical on the second url -pointing to the first. A visitor can however still access the pages. Google bot normally respects the canonical - but is not obliged to do so.
A 301 is different - in fact you give the message to the browser: this page is no longer available on this location but has moved to a new location. It's no longer possible to visit the original page (not for humans & not for bots). Google bot has to respect this directive.
A last option you can use is the "noindex/follow". This you normally use for pages that have very little value for search engines, but where you still would like the bots to follow and index the pages which are listed. This you can use for pages of type blog.com/tag/subject - that are generating lists with all the articles marked with subject. In general pages like this are good for cross linking, however have low value for search engines so it's better to not have them indexed.
Hope this clarifies,
Dirk
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
-
Sub Domain rel=canonical to Main Domain
Just a quick one, i have the following example scenario. Main Domain: http://www.test.com Sub Domain: http://sub.test.com What I am wondering is I can add onto the sub domain a rel=canonical to the main domain. I dont want to de-index the whole sub domain just a few pages are duplicated from the main site. Is it easier to de-index the individual sub domain pages or add the rel=canonical back to the main domain. Much appreciated Joseph
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Joseph-Vodafone0 -
Can I leave off HTTP/HTTPS in a canonical tag?
We are working on moving our site to HTTPS and I was asked by my dev team if it is required to declare HTTP or HTTPS in the canonical tag? I know that relative URL's are acceptable but cannot find anything about HTTP/HTTPS. Example of what they would like to do Has anyone done this? Any reason to not leave off the protocol?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Shawn_Huber0 -
Do industry partner links violate Google's policies?
We're in the process of The Great _Inquisition_piecing together a reconsideration request. In doing so, we reached out to an agency to filter and flag our backlinks as safe, should be no-followed, or should be removed. The problem is, they flagged several of our earned, industry partner links (like those pointing to us, HireAHelper, from 1-800-Pack-Rat and PODS for example) as either should be no-followed or should be removed. I have a hard time believing Google would penalize such a natural source of earned links, but then again, this is our second attempt at a Reconsideration Request, and I want to cover all my bases. What say you Moz community? No-follow? Remove? Leave alone?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | DanielH0 -
Macrae's Blue Book Directory LIsting
Does anyone know more information about this directory? Is it a good quality directory that I should pay to get listed on?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | EcomLkwd0 -
Rel author and duplicate content
I have a question if a page who a im the only author, my web will duplicate content with the blog posts and the author post as they are the same. ¿what is your suggestion in that case? thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | maestrosonrisas0 -
Will my association's network of sites get penalized for link farming?
Before beginning I found these similar topics here: http://www.seomoz.org/q/multiple-domains-on-same-ip-address-same-niche-but-different-locations http://www.seomoz.org/q/multiple-domains-on-1-ip-address We manage over two dozen dental sites that are individually owned through out the US. All these dentists are in a dental association which we also run and are featured on (http://www.acedentalresource.com/). Part of the dental associations core is sharing information to make them better dentists and to help their patients which in addition to their education, is why they are considered to be some of the best dentists in the world. As such, we build links from what we consider to be valuable content between the sites. Some sites are on different IPs and C-Blocks, some are not. Given the fact that each site is only promoting the dentist at that brick and mortar location but also has "follow" links to other dentists' content in the network we fear that we are in the grey area of link building practices. Questions are: Is there an effective way to utilize the power of the network if quality content is being shared? What risks are we facing given our network? Should each site be on a different IP? Would having some of our sites on different servers make our backlinks more valuable than having all of our sites under the same server? If it is decided that having unique IPs is best practice, would it be obvious that we made the switch? Keep in mind that ALL sites are involved in the association, so naturally they would be linking to each other, and the main resource website mentioned above. Thanks for your input!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | DigitalElevator0 -
Is it outside of Google's search quality guidelines to use rel=author on the homepage?
I have recently seen a few competitors using rel=author to markup their homepage. I don't want to follow suit if it is outside of Google's search quality guidelines. But I've seen very little on this topic, so any advice would be helpful. Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | smilingbunny0 -
Does Google Penalize for Managing multiple Google Places from the same IP Address? Can you manage from same google account or separate? Or does it matter since it's created from the same IP?
I manage a number of client's Google Places from the same IP and heard this is not a good thing. Are there Do's and Don'ts when managing multiple Google Places? Create separate google accounts for each or can you use the same account?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Souk0