Mobile Canonical Tag Issue
-
Hey so,
For our site
we have the desktop version: www.site.com/product-name/product-code/The mobile version www.site.com/mobile/product-name/product-code
So...on the desktop version we'd have the following..
| |
Now my question is, what do we do as far as canonicals on the actual mobile URL?
Would it be this?
| |
| |OR are we NOT supposed to have mobile canonical tags whatsoever since we've already added "rel alternate" ?
Would like some clarificaiton.
| | |
-
Not the parameter, specifically speaking, You need to have the canonical on the mobile URL exactly match the primary URL of the non-mobile page. So removing the /mobile/ directory from the URL.
(Technically, a parameter is something added at the end of a URL with a "?" so /product/product-code?sort=desc for example, which you didn't show on your examples. Canonical URLS should never include such parameters. In fact one of the main reasons for using canonicals is to fix issues with extra unwanted parameters being indexed as separate page. Didn't want to risk confusion here.)
Paul
-
Hi Paul! If ThompsonPaul answered your question, would you mind marking his reply as a "Good Answer?" It helps us keep track of things, and it'll give him some bonus MozPoints.
-
Perfect, so then I need to remove the parameter that's included in the mobile canonical tag.
Thanks!
-
You need to include the canonical tag you described on the mobile URLs, Paul.
That's what "closes the loop" for the search engines to understand how those pages are related to each other, regardless of which one they land on first.
(another) Paul
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
-
Best use of Canonical Tag with Mini-Websites
Hello, I was wondering what the best way would be to implement Canonical Tags in kind of a unusual situation. The company I work for creates single property websites for real estate agents. We register a URL such as 123MainSt.com - however through DNS we redirect that to a path. For example: http://www.944milmadadr.com would redirect to: https://www.qwikvid.com/realestate/go/v1/home/?idx=wDg1Gdwt7wnQiR3LMeCx28qPnWTKM0JV If we wanted to rank high in the search engines for our clients: "944 Milmada Dr" - Would it be the best practice to Canonical: http://www.944milmadadr.com ? Thanks in advance for any feedback on this!! Jason
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Qwikvid0 -
Href Lang tags in audit
Hi I am getting a couple of issues flag with my href lang tags, but when I manually check the pages I can't see the issues. Issue 1. No self referencing href lang tag example URL - http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/300kg-capacity-manutan-mobile-lift-table-lift-height-860mm-125h204 (these are SKU pages with duplicate content, so we have canonicals pointing to the main product page) Issue 2. Conflicting hreflang and rel=canonical - http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/500kg-capacity-manutan-mobile-lift-table-lift-height-945mm-127h204 I have checked the source code of the pages with errors against the pages which don't have errors and they look the same - so I am unsure what's wrong?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Why isn't the canonical tag on my client's Magento site working?
The reason for this mights be obvious to the right observer, but somehow I'm not able to spot the reason why. The situation:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Inevo
I'm doing an SEO-audit for a client. When I'm checking if the rel=canonical tag is in place correctly, it seems like it: view-source:http://quickplay.no/fotball-mal.html?limit=15) (line nr 15) Anyone seing something wrong with this canonical? When I perform a site:http://quickplay.no/ search, I find that there's many url's indexed that ought to have been picked up by the canonical-tag: (see picture) ..this for example view-source:http://quickplay.no/fotball-mal.html?limit=15 I really can't see why this page is getting indexed, when the canonical-tag is in place. Anybody who can? Sincerely 🙂 GMdWg0K0 -
Google ignoring Canonical and choosing its own
Hey Mozzers, We have several products that all have upto 6 different versions, they are the same product but in a different specification. As users search via these specifications (within our website) it is beneficial to keep all 6 products as different listings on the website. In google however it is not. So we kept all 6 listing but chose 1 to be the google landing page, the only different between them all is the technical specification + occasionally size. But 95% of the pages are the same. Let call the products A, B, C, D, E, F, we made all the canonicals point to C because this is out best selling version of the product. However, google has chosen E to rank instead. What is my best move here? Should i accept the page google has chosen and change the canonicals the point to that version or should I be stubborn and try to get google to change which version it ranks. As always many thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ATP0 -
Multiple brands issue
My client has his main brand on the domain name .com and then 3 brands that exist on .com/brandA , com/brandB and .com/brandC We created a lot of content for .com main brand and we noticed that brandB copied some of our content and put it on .com/brandB . How to deal with this? Canonical tags?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | aliciaporrata10090 -
Crawl diagnostic issue?
I'am sorry if my English isn't very good, but this is my problem at the moment: On two of my campagnes I get a weird error on Moz Analytics: 605 Page Banned by robots.txt, X-Robots-Tag HTTP Header, or Meta Robots Tag Moz Analytics points to an url that starts with: http:/**/None/**www.????.com. We don't understand how Moz indexed this non-existing page that starts with None? And how can we solve this error? I hope that someone can help me.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nettt0 -
Title Tag Best Practices
In light of all the Google updates in 2013, have you updated/changed your title tag best practices? Is the format of (Keyword | Brand) still working well for your optimization efforts or have you started incorporating an approach similar to this format . (Keyword in a Sentence | Brand) Thanks in advance for your opinions.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SEO5Team0 -
Advanced Title Tags
Looking for some advanced help here. I've been reading a lot of conflicting information on this, and I am hoping someone can clear this up. My question is regarding length and complexity of title tags. For example, my top level keywords are: IT Support, IT Services, IT Outsourcing, Help Desk, etc. I also have pages for many modified versions ex: IT Support Services, Managed IT Services, etc. I have robust pages for each. Should my title tag be: IT Support | CSM Corp. - Simple IT Support Company | CSM Corp. (Picks up a longer tail) or IT Support | Secondary Keyword | CSM Corp. Does adding secondary keywords dilute the strength of the primary keyword? If long is preferable, can someone give me an example using "IT Support"?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CsmBill0