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
-
Is it better to shorten my existing url to use only keyword after domain with a 301 redirect from existing url
I have a long existing URL that has included my key word but the url has about 5 additional words in the text ( eg url would have " /super widgets in stock at the widget store " as url text after domain. keywords is super widget The URL was at the top of search results for my keyword for many years until recently. Is it better to shorten my url text to now use only my keyword " /super-widgets " after the domain with a 301 direct from my existing url to optimize it Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | mrkingsley2 -
Internal Duplicate Content/Canonical Issue/ or nothing to worry about
Unfortunately, my developer cannot give me an answer to this so I really do hope someone can help. The homepage of my website is http://www.laddersfree.co.uk however I also have a page http://www.laddersfree.co.uk/index.php that has a page rank and essentially duplicates the home page. Does someone know what this is? Do I need to get my developer to do a 404? It is worrying that he has not come back to me. Thanks Jason
On-Page Optimization | | gymmad0 -
Will canonical tag on non-copy content harm my site?
Days ago I added rel=canonical tags on my site. For the post pages, I add canonical tag on both post page (www.exmample.com/post.html) and comment page (www.exmample.com/post-sms.html), all the canonical tags are pointing to post page, but in fact there are only comments on the comment page. For product pages, I add the canonical tags on both product info page, download page, and order page, all of them are pointing to the info page, while in fact they are displaying different content. I no-indexed the comment page, download page, and order page for a long time. After I added the canonical tags, the traffics dropped (not hugely but slowly and steadily). Are my actions harming my site? Is this a normal flux after adding codes to the entire site, or it's the bad outcome for wrong SEO actions? PS: I can't change the site structure, so it's not possible to combine post and comment pages into one, so do the product pages. Thank you guys
On-Page Optimization | | JonnyGreenwood0 -
Should I add canonical tag on these pages?
Hi folks I have some pages that used to rank pretty well..but I believe it is affected due to the content similarities. Here is one the sub category pages http://www.ilovebodykits.com/category/98/2/Full-Body-Kits_Duraflex.html the main category page http://www.ilovebodykits.com/category/98/Exterior_Body-Styling_Full-Body-Kits.html These 2 links have very similar contents. The content are dynamic generated by template and I don't think I am able to change content for each individual pages since there are over 2000-3000 of them or more. Should I use canonical tag on the Duraflex.html page to give the main category page all the link juices and credits? There are about 20 other pages like this under this main category. Is it right to canonical all of them? Please let me know if anyone has any suggestion.. thanks
On-Page Optimization | | ilovebodykits0 -
Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical
I have encountered problems regarding rel canonical. When I ran On-Page Report Card it says **Error: ** Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical Canonical URL: "http://www.sourcedental.createmyid.net/teeth-whitening/" Explanation: If the canonical tag is pointing to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. Make sure you're targeting the right page (if this isn't it, you can reset the target above) and then change the canonical tag to reference that URL. Recommendation We check to make sure that IF you use canonical URL tags, it points to the right page. If the canonical tag points to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. If you've not made this page the rel=canonical target, change the reference to this URL. NOTE: For pages not employing canonical URL tags, this factor does not apply." I just don't know how to fix this. I am using Wordpress SEO by Yoast but I haven't change any settings regarding rel canonical. Can anyone help me with this? Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | projectassistant0 -
How much juice do you lose in a 301 redirect?
Our site has a number of, shall we say, unoptimized URLs. I would like to change the URLs to be more relevant; if a page is about red widgets, the URL should be www.domain.com/red-widgets.html, right? I'm getting resistance on this, however, based on the belief that you lose something significant when you 301 an old URL to a new one. Now, I know that if you have a long chain of redirects, the spiders will stop following at some point, and that is a huge problem. That wouldn't apply if there's only one step in the chain, however. I've also heard that you lose some link juice in a 301, but I'm unsure how serious that problem actually is. Is it small enough that we'd win out in the long run with better-optimized URLs?
On-Page Optimization | | CMC-SD0 -
What does Canonical mean?
Hi, I was wondering what is meant by canonical? I ran a test on my site and in the notices, SEOMOZ came back with a total of 90 canonicals. As far as I can tell, it refers to the preferred page (not really sure what that means though). I thought initially it was talking about duplicate content, but all the pages are totally different. There is no duplicate content on any of he pages that it lists. So I'm not sure how to fix this. Thanks for the help. Don
On-Page Optimization | | ge01734000 -
Does 301 generate organic content ?
I manage this domain name www.jordanhundley.com . Right now it is 301 to www.jordanhundley.net where I hosted the content for almost 18 months. At this point you are only able to read the 301 script if you use CTRL U at the .com domain. Does Google read the content beyond the script? Is the 301 website getting juice from the targeted domain ? This is the script I´m using <html> <head> <title>Jordan Hundleytitle> head> <frameset rows="100%,*" border="0"> <frame src="[http://www.jordanhundley.net](view-source:http://www.jordanhundley.net/)" frameborder="0" /> frameset><noframes>noframes> html>
On-Page Optimization | | mPloria0