Site build in the 80% of canonical URLs - What is the impact on visibility?
-
Hey Everyone,
I represent international wall decorations store where customer can freely choose a pattern to be printed on a given material among a few milions of patterns. Due to extreme large number of potential URL combinations we struggle with too many URL adressess for a months now (search console notifications). So we finally decided to reduce amount of products with canonical tag. Basing on users behavior, our business needs and monthly search volume data we selected 8 most representative out of 40 product categories and made them canonical toward the rest.
For example: If we chose 'Canvas prints' as our main product category, then every 'Framed canvas' product URL points rel=canonical tag toward its equivalent URL within 'Canvas prints' category. We applied the same logic to other categories (so "Vinyl wall mural - Wild horses running" URL points rel=canonical tag to "Wall mural - Wild horses running" URL, etc).
In terms of Googlebot interpretation, there are really tiny differences between those Product URLs, so merging them with rel=canonical seems like a valid use. But we need to keep those canonicalised URLs for users needs, so we can`t remove them from a store as well as noindex does not seem like an good option.
However we`re concerned about our SEO visibility - if we make those changes, our site will consist of ~80% canonical URLs (47,5/60 millions). Regarding your experience, do you have advices how should we handle that issue?
Regards
JMB -
Thanks for your opinion David.We use a dedicated solution based on Symphony framework but we migrate to Kohana currently - that
s why we decided it
s good time to make changes in the SEO field as well. -
Hi JMB,
I agree with Andy and think what you've done will work well.
What CMS does the site use?
I've worked on plenty of big Magento e-commerce sites (from 5k to 5mil pages - so not quite your 60 mil!), but Magento handles this kind of thing very well by default, and in much the same way you have described.
Magento always canonicalizes product URLs to the base URL, no matter what product category they are in.
Eg. a product could be available under multiple categories and it will always use the same canonical tag:
yoursite.com/category-1/product-name/
yoursite.com/category-1/sub-cat/product-name/
yoursite.com/category-1/sub-cat-2/product-name/
yoursite.com/category-2/product-name/All of these variations would be canonicalized to:
This works perfectly and I've never seen any issues with this.
The only difference with yours is that products are canonicalized to a main category - which actually sounds better to me because then the canonical URL is actually linked from the site (not just "linked" through canonical tags).
I think you'll see some great results with what you've done! But it might take a few months to see the results on a site that size!
Cheers,
David
-
Yes I mean in terms of organic search positions. We have solid UX team, and all the other channels are very well covered.
-
When you say the site is under-performing, are you talking just in terms of search positions or once you get visitors there as well? Is the UX all in order and have you completed tests to make sure people are navigating their way around correctly?
-Andy
-
Hey Andy, thanks for your response. We decided to do it right know because of major website changes we are going through currently (framework, layout, tree category etc.). There was no significant organic traffic drop but site is underperforming in general, and we excluded other explanations such as backlink profile or strong competitors.
-
Hi JMB,
What you have done sounds like it makes sense. A little awkward to visualise, but reducing duplication / similar pages through the use of rel=canonical is the right thing to do.
Aside from search console, was there a drop in the SERP's that made you want to do something about this?
Regarding SEO, don't worry about your site having so many canonical pages. The root page is there for indexing while the canonical pages are needed for the user - it sounds to me like you are doing the right thing.
-Andy
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
-
Consolidating small sites into one big site
Hi I have several small review sites in multiple categories and want to consolidate them into a single review site(aged domain I just bought) I'd redirect the old sites to the new one. If I just copied all the old articles onto the new website with solid DA, would this work or would Google think Im trying to start a PBN? Thanks! Eddie
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | calentador20190 -
I'm seeing thousands of no-follow links on spam sites. Can you help figure it out?
I noticed that we are receiving thousands of links from many different sites that are obviously disguised as something else. The strange part is that some of them are legitimate sites when you go to the root. I would say 99% of the page titles read something like : 1 Hour Loan Approval No Credit Check Vermont, go cash advance - africanamericanadaa.com. Can someone please help me? Here are some of the URL's we are looking at: http://africanamericanadaa.com/genialt/100-dollar-loans-for-people-with-no-credit-colorado.html http://muratmakara.com/sickn/index.php?recipe-for-cone-06-crackle-glaze http://semtechblog.com/tacoa/index.php?chilis-blue-raspberry-margarita http://wesleygcook.com/rearc/guaranteed-personal-loans-oregon.html
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | TicketCity0 -
Does Google Consider a Follow Affiliate Link into my site a paid link?
Let's say I have a link coming into my domain like this http://www.mydomain.com/l/freerol.aspx?AID=674&subid=Week+2+Freeroll&pid=120 Do you think Google recognizes this as paid link? These links are follow links. I am working on a site that has tons of these, but ranks fairly well. They did lose some ranking over the past month or so, and I am wondering if it might be related to a recent iteration of Penguin. These are very high PR inbound links and from a number of good domains, so I would not want to make a mistake and have client get affiliates to no follow if that is going to cause his rankings to drop more. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Robertnweil10 -
What do you say in your emails to horrible sites to remove your links?
Morning guys, I've the unenviable task of having to rectify poor link building (a previous company's work, not mine) which inevitably means emailing tons and tons of horrible directories with links to the client from as far back as 5/6 years ago. I'm sure many of you are in the same boat so it begs the question: What have you said to these types of sites that is effective in getting them to remove the links? This could even be a two/three-parter: If you've had little joy in requesting removals, have you dis-avowed the links, and what (if any) effect did it have? Thanks, M.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Martin_S0 -
Many sites added some excerpts of my Blog post and linking back ? Most of them are Spamy site !
Many sites added some excerpts of my Blog post and linking back ? Most of them are Spamy site ! Some are great blogs, but some blogs just copy some excerpts and link back to them - which i never approve. Will it affect my blog. i ask them to remove it. no use. !
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Esaky0 -
Why is this site not being punished!?
I guess this is the usual reaction to a seeing a domain rank above your own website is "They must be cheating"! However... in this case I feel more than justified. The website is aircon247.com they rank top 3 in the UK for "air conditioning" and other quite generic terms in the industry. I'm interested to know your thoughts and what (if any) action should be taken. Here are many of the links that I think contravene the Google Guidelines : Spammy Article Submissions with Inorganic Anchor Text: http://www.furniturearcade.com/decorative-furniture/decorative-accessories-lamps/ http://www.sys-con.com/node/2308271 http://www.bucksherald.co.uk/imagine-a-world-without-air-conditioning-units-7-112555 http://www.retail-digital.com/press_releases/appliances/diy-air-conditioning-installation-options http://www.livingwithwhite.com/three-fun-uses-for-antique-grates-and-floor-registers/ http://www.mcrjk2008.com/2009/04/best-air-conditioning-ever.html http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/comfort-your-business-needs-1682737.htm http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/diy-air-conditioning-installation-options-1677015.htm http://www.housetohome.co.uk/topical-advice/531054/regulating-your-home-environment http://homeklondike.com/2011/01/10/country-style-bedroom-design-ideas/ http://professorshouse.com/Building-a-house/Plumbing-Heating/Articles/Energy-Efficient-Air-Conditioners/ http://www.greenscenedebate.com/2009/04/take-good-luck-at-air-conditioning.html#.URzEmh17L5w http://www.harlynn.com/2009/04/wanna-chill-out.html http://www.loveshaven.com/2009/04/we-are-all-so-excited-for-my-sisters.html http://asiwaspassing.com/2009/05/ Spammy Links in External Website Footers / Side Bars with Inorganic Anchor Text: http://www.w-int.com/ http://www.g-dir.com/home/gardening/ http://www.s-dir.com/ http://www.sefdir.org/popular-listings.html http://www.ribcast.com/ http://rapidcoolsite.com/Home.html http://www.index-guide.org/ http://e-dir.org/ http://www.singaporerealestate.info/blog/?s=%27the+solitaire+call%27 http://www.onlinepureherbs.com/acidity.htm http://erostours.com/cheap-flights-Chicago.html http://www.search-way.com/ http://koolergazi.persianblog.ir/ Blog Spam Inorganic Anchor Text: http://edcel.net/2009/05/ http://www.bluehatseo.com/quick-answers-1-link-building/ Spammy (Link exchange etc.) Directories: http://ireland.accommodationforstudents.com/info/reciprocal_links_ad.asp http://baliscript.net/barter-links.php http://www.abacushosting.ca/linx.php http://www.whelphelper.com/links.php http://www.spectramedi.com/links_shopping.htm https://www.midwayautosupply.com/linkexchange.aspx? http://artsellart.com/links.html http://www.linkalizer.com/directory/39-1/ http://dogdir.com/region/NA.php http://www.easyezinearticles.com/ezineresources/Outsourcing.htm http://www.patchhomeinspections.com/Links.html http://autoharpusa.com/index.html?p=10 http://www.baliscript.net/webdesign-links.php
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | trickshotric0 -
Can someone explain how a site with no DA, links or MozTrust, MozRank can rank #1 in the SERPs?
I do SEO for a legal site in the UK and one of the keywords I'm targeting is 'Criminal Defence Solicitors'. If you search this term in Google.co.uk this site comes top www.cdsolicitors.co.uk, yet in my mozbar it has 0 links, 0 DA etc, I noticed it top a few weeks ago and thought something spammy was going on; I thought if I was patient, Google would remove it, however it still hasn't. Can someone explain how it is top in the SERPs? I've never seen this before. thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | TobiasM0 -
Using Canonical Tags to Boost Lead Form Ranking
I presently have a number of whitepapers that bring traffic to our site. If a visitor elects to download the whitepaper they are taken to a lead form with an abstract of the whitepaper. The abstract is present because the visitor may or may not have come to the lead form directly. I imagine this would be a "no no," but how do you feel about placing a canoncial tag on a whitepaper that points to the lead form w/ abstract? The obvious idea being to take the umph of a whitepaper to direction search visitors directly to the lead form.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | shoffy0