301 to canonical
-
I'm doing some work on a website, they have a very popular product search where you enter a specific part code (6 digits) and it takes you to the product. So for example
Search: 123456
Page redirected to domain.com/product/123456
With a canonical of domain.com/product/this-is-the-product-title
Would it be beneficial to redirect from /product/123456 to /product/this-is-the-product-title
Google seems to be indexing both versions. For some of these products a reasonable amount of links are built.
-
No prob, let me know how things turn out (professional curiosity)
Like yourself my main project is dated in areas and a workaround is more cost effective than a rebuild, always interesting to see how people get around issues.
GL!
-
The 123456 url is only used in once place (or on banners in various places) any time this is in a category it is using the canonical url, once stock is loaded it only takes an hour for this to pull through. So the mass of links to this is the canonical url (however it usually has some form of tracking attached to it)
It's a very large and dated website, so we've got to try and get workarounds until development get round to sorting this kind of thing.
The mass of urls are showing as the canonicals, we've just got a few (hundreds) that aren't playing ball.
Really appreciate your help.
-
Sorry just want to check i understand this,
The product is originally created as domain.com/123456.html and is utilised at this url for a period of time.
You get the canonical url of domain.com/product-title.html later the day the product goes live.
You then create the canonical url and insert the canonical tags at a later time?
If all these are correct then it could explain why your having issues.
Google will crawl and index 123456.html pretty quickly, if this is the base url the product is created at you will most likely find that the links off your category pages use this url and any initial links use this url, this is bad for what you are trying to achieve.
When you then change to the canonical you create a situation where you have 2 copies of the page. 1 with loads of links pointing to it, especially internally, and another with no links. But your trying to tell google that the one with no links is the main version. I would bet this is why it is indexing both.
Even if you change all of the links and add the correct canonical tag it can take time for google to change, even then it can choose to ignore it (it can be frustrating).
Ideally you want to create the canonical URL first or at the same time as the 123456.html url and instantly add all the canonical tags, this way that all default links that a created internally point to it, and the first time it gets crawled it is already pointing to the canonical url.
In your current timetable, I would say redirects would be more suitable than canonical for both the order you release them and the general use.
About your plan,
If your timings are correct, then sure, that doesn't sound like too much of a time commitment and i think the benefit would be worth it. What I would expect to see within the month is the de-indexing of all the 123456.html versions
**Just remember, check all your canonicals actually need a 301 before doing them on bulk. You may have places on your site that you have canonicals because both versions of a page are needed, don't redirect these in your haste
-
Thank you for your response ATP.
I've done numerous checks and we're following all of the best practices, the only thing I can think of is that this url is the first that's seen (we only release stock on a time due to the nature of the business, we then only get the canonical on that day) so any scheduled work uses the part code, which we then at a later date manually change to the canonical url.
We are always trying to get these links changed to the correct version, however as we have a large site (570k+ pages) crawling for these is always an issue.
We can quite comfortably get a list of the canonicals thanks to screaming frog and being able to export our product codes (which are these six digit numbers). So you think it would be a viable solution to bulk upload our whole product catalog and on the /product/123456 urls redirecting to the /product/product-title and we should see a benefit from this? (Would take about an hours work initially then just adding current urls being 5 minutes a day)
-
Hi Thomas,
Firstly, the canonical does the same job as the 301 (for all intensive purposes) without the physical redirect. So in theory only the canonical should be being indexed and all the link juice should be being passed.
The fact that both are indexed suggests that the canonical isn't behaving as intended
- I would check for common cannonical errors to begin with
- If this isn't the case, i would suggest that the 123456 version has too many links maybe internally and externally and that google is ignoring the canonical because it has too much authority.
An issue with using canonical like this is that people who use the search are not sent to the main canonical url. This gives people the opportunity to copy and link to the wrong version of the url, which isn't a practice you want.
A possible solution would be to find all backlinks and get them changed to the main canonical version internally and externally, this could be a lot of work.
The 301 redirect is better in my opinion because it achieves the following
- Customer always see a useful URL and the main canonical URL
- Because of this, links will only likely be built the the url you want
- Google will de-index the 123456 version because it becomes inaccessible
However, unless you can automate this procedure, it can take too much time to create all those 301's for every product.
Personally i use the following guidlines as i find it keeps things clean and tidy
301 any url that isn't domain.com/main-product-url.html
keep the canonical on domain.com/main-product-url.html so that any version created from filtering or unexpected cms pages dont create duplicate content.
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
-
301 and the base URL
Hi, please bear with me as I'm pretty new to all this! I've my base URL but obviously want to add keywords to it for seo purposes. Should I redirect from the base URL to the URL with the keywords appended? So my landing page goes from say www.moz.com to www.moz.com/keywords-here. If I do that, should I replicate all the meta data (descriptions etc) on the original landing page? Or does it not matter? Thanks, Nick
On-Page Optimization | | nickwoodward0 -
I still don't understand how rel=canonical works. Help?
So here's the deal. I write for many different outlets. I also have many different pages on my blog that have duplicates (authorized, of course). On my blog, I have many different pages that redirect to "the original" content. I've only recently discovered the existence of rel=canonical. However I don't understand how it works. I have very specific questions. Can anyone help? If, on my blog, I have a blog post that's the original. And another website has the same content, used with authorization. If I want to tell search engines that the original content is on MY blog, what can I do? Is the only solution to ask the owner of the other blog to add a rel=canonical in the header of the specific post? If, on my blog, I have a blog post that's NOT the original. Do I simply add rel=canonical to the header, then add a link to the original in the body? If, on my blog, I have THE FIRST 300 WORDS of a blog post, then add a link saying "to read the whole article, click here" with a link pointing to the original, do I need to have a rel=canonical tag somewhere? Does it HAVE to be in the header? Can rel=canonical be used in the - What penalties are included with having duplicate content of my work everywhere on the web? I've been trying to find specifics, but can't. Thanks for the help. I'm quite confused, as you can see.
On-Page Optimization | | cedriklizotte0 -
Duplicate ecommerce domains and canonical
Hi everybody! I'd like to discuss the SEO strategy I've thought regarding a client of mine and ask for help because it's a serious case of duplicate content. There is a main website (the business model one) where he compares the cost of medicines in several pharmacies, to show the cheapest shopping cart to the customer. But the shopping has to been made in another domain, within the selected pharmacie, because my country's law in Europe says that is compulsory to sell the medicines only on the pharmacy website. So my client has started to create domains, one for each pharmacy, where the differences between them are only some products, the business information of the pharmacy and the template's colour. But all of them shares the same product data base. My aim is to rank the comparing website (it contains all the products), not each pharmacy, so I've started to create different content for this one. Should I place rel=canonical in the pharmacies domains t the original one? For instance: www.pharmacie1.com >> www.originaltorank.com www.pharmacie2.com >> www.originaltorank.com www.pharmacie1.com/product-10 >> www.originaltorank.com/product-10 I've already discuss the possibilities to focus all the content in only one website, but it's compulsory to have different domains in order to sell medicines By the way, I can't redirect 301 because I need these websites exist for the same reason (the law) He is creating 1-3 new domains every week so obviously he has had a drop in his SEO traffic that I have to solve this fast. Do you think the canonical will be the best solution? I dont want to noindex these domains beacuse we're creating Google Local pages for each one in order to be found in their villages. Please, I'll appreciate any piece of advice. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | Estherpuntu0 -
Canonical URL Category and Tags
Hello, I would like to know that I want to use both category and tags in my blog StylishMahi. If I index both category and tags, should I use canonical URL tag to pass referring to main category. As I want more my categories in SERP results ranking higher? I have also attached a picture. Can someone please confirm? Photo by Moz ZigdWMx
On-Page Optimization | | PratapSingh0 -
Site wide 301 or canonical links.
Hi guys, I'd like add code to my header file to specify www. as opposed to just http:// for the canonical links across my entire site. How can I do this? I'd like it to be site wide code that I can just add to my header.php file which is included across the site.
On-Page Optimization | | absoauto0 -
Canonical URL tags help I am not sure what this is
I am trying to get an A grade on my webpage and this is one of the critical steps canonical URL tags I cant find much information as to what this even is never mind fixing it. Thanks I am a total newbe at this any advice is appreciated
On-Page Optimization | | gemfirez0 -
301 redirect results in plummeting DA. Why?
I redirected from my .co.uk site to my .com site (www.salesandinternetmarketing) and my Domain Authority has gone from 44 to 33!? Also SEO Moz states that it's crawled all my pages, yet isn't showing any on page reports, inculding keyword usage, meta descriptions, etc. I'm very confused and not receiving clear answers from the support team (they've said one of the reasons is that my keywords are not ranked in the top 50, well some are, nevertheless I should still be getting some report info shouldn't I)? Can someone please help, I'm rather fed up as this has been going on a for a couple of weeks now
On-Page Optimization | | lindsayjhopkins0 -
My report also notes that I have 176 Rel Canonical. What does this mean and how do I fix it. Thanks
My report also notes that I have 176 Rel Canonical. What does this mean and how do I fix it. Thanks http://pro.seomoz.org/campaigns/95663/issues/18
On-Page Optimization | | cyaindc0