Rel=Canonical Tag on Homepage
-
I have a Rel=canonical Tag (link rel="canonical" href="htttps://homepage.com") on the homepage. Could this possibly have a negative effect? is it necessary?
-
I would suggest having a bit of a read over this old blog post which gives you the necessary info to implement the rel=canonical tag correctly.
https://moz.com/blog/rel-confused-answers-to-your-rel-canonical-questions
I do not think that having the rel=canonical tag pointing to itself would necessarily harm your site, but it is probably best to avoid this if possible as is redundant code. If you have a dynamic meta / header include this might be the best solution for you if you cannot control it manually or by editing the code. I often have the rel canonical running in numerous pages, especially to help reduce MVT pages from being indexed.
-
Hi there,
It's not necessary, because you are pointing the same URL, there is no actual canonicalization.
Personaly I believe that it will not do any harm, but its redundant. And it's not advisable to have redundant code.Hope it helps.
GR. -
It's not necessary to point a canonical tag back to itself. Seems to be a debate about whether or not it's negative but on the whole it's a misuse of the tag to itself.
From reading around, the only advantage would be if someone where to scrape your content and the canonical link would still be in the html assuming they don't remove it so you would get the credit.
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
-
Do crawler reads ahrefs tag which is just a text written in html form ,not a hyperlink or blue text, ?
i recently posted a back link but it didnot turn into hyperlink but just a html ahref tag, does it give any link equity? does it behave as a link because its not clickable?
Algorithm Updates | | calvinkj0 -
Does Google giving more important to internal pages than homepage recently? Especially after the recent Major algo update?
Hi everybody, I can see the change Google brought in the SERP. Previously website homepages will be shown for primary keywords, now it's slowly and almost switched to showing most related internal pages in a website. You can check same for keyword "SEO", Most or all the results are internal pages. I can see this change for our primary keyword from last one month. So basically Google is trying to show a page explaining about the primary keywords rather than website, that's how "what is seo" pages are ranking than homepages. If there is no such pages existed or not well written, Google is just showing the website homepage. But I noticed that websites ranking with homepages are dropped compared to the websites with dedicated page about that primary keyword. Please share your thoughts. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Optimising meta tags: How to write them perfectly without duplicating? Impact of using different keywords?
Hi friends, Generally most of the articles about tags are either title rag or header tags, but not about both. I would like to know how to write perfect title and header tags. How much they must be relevant and different? Can we use the same tags for title and H1? If we are planning to rank for different keywords, can that different keywords can be used? I'm really curious to see some interesting answers for this. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Should you include Website Title in all page title tags?
We recently spent analyzing some of the best SEO software companies on the U.S. market fishing for the best practices in SEO and I saw one thing in common : They all had website titles in all the page title tags separated by " | " Is that the best practice for SEO or is it just for Branding? Interestingly enough, the website titles were completely unrelated to the pages' content or keywords. (Here's my personal opinion on what it looked like: "riding on a bicycle" | Ferrari ) But when I looked up the keywords ... ranked #1 or #2 spots, in some serious competition. (So in the example above, "bicycle" would be in the top spot)
Algorithm Updates | | HMCOE0 -
Meta keywords tag?
Because Google is cracking on spammy keywords should I remove my meta keywords tag altogether? I hear they dont factor it in anyway?
Algorithm Updates | | dfwgolfer0 -
Canonical Tag being ignored?
I have a blog post I created and added a canonical to that page, yet the blog post is the one showing in Google's results and not the canonical version. Why is this?
Algorithm Updates | | Thos0030 -
HTML5: What changes in tag optimization?
Can anyone shad som light on on page optimization for HTML5? Does google already taking the new section tag in consideration? How about heading? I read somewhere that now Google can digest multiple H1 heading. Is that true and is that recomended? Thanks a lot
Algorithm Updates | | dadaseo0 -
No-follow tags on links in the footer...do it or don't do it?
With some of the great reports SEOMoz has provided I've been able to start to take the correct steps towards fixing crawl issues, on-page issues, etc. One of my websites allows a customer to drill down to their specific state and then their city to apply for an auto loan. The SEOMoz reports told me I had too many links on these pages specifically. One of my ways to remedy this would be to add "no-follow" tags on the links in the footer as well as the links to the cities. Am I steering myself in the right/wrong direction? Should I be approaching this problem from a different perspective? Any help is greatly appreciated!
Algorithm Updates | | fergseo0