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?
-
Great thank you. I'm just unsure as to why they're flagging as errors anyway
Thank you!
-
There isn't an error in the markup for the two pages that you shared. Hreflang markup on duplicate pages is useless so you will not lose anything by getting rid of hreflang on these pages. You can try deleting hreflang and see what happens. You only need hreflang on canonical versions of the page. (in your case it would be pages like http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/mobile-lift-tables and http://www.keyonline.ie/en/kie/mobile-lift-tables and not http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/300kg-capacity-manutan-mobile-lift-table-lift-height-860mm-125h204)
Or you can leave it as is and ignore the errors because duplicate pages should have no effect either way.
-
Great thank you, Ill check the bing tracking too!
-
This response from John Doherty might help you out... https://moz.com/community/q/correct-hreflang-canonical-implementation-for-multilingual-site
One other thing of note was your bing webmaster tools configuration looked broken.
name="msvalidate.01" content="???MI386_BING_ID???"/>
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
-
No index detected in robots meta tag GSC issue_Help Please
Hi Everyone, We just did a site migration ( URL structure change, site redesign, CMS change). During migration, dev team messed up badly on a few things including SEO. The old site had pages canonicalized and self canonicalized <> New site doesn't have anything (CMS dev error) so we are working retroactively to add canonicalization mechanism The legacy site had URL’s ending with a trailing slash “/” <> new site got redirected to Set of url’s without “/” New site action : All robots are allowed: A new sitemap is submitted to google search console So here is my problem (it been a long 24hr night for me 🙂 ) 1. Now when I look at GSC homepage URL it says that old page is self canonicalized and currently in index (old page with a trailing slash at the end of URL). 2. When I try to perform a live URL test, I get the message "No: 'noindex' detected in 'robots' meta tag" , so indexation cant be done. I have no idea where noindex is coming from. 3. Robots.txt in search console still showing old file ( no noindex there ) I tried to submit new file but old one still coming up. When I click on "See live robots.txt" I get current robots. 4. I see that old page is still canonicalized and attempting to index redirected old page might be confusing google Hope someone can help to get the new page indexed! I really need it 🙂 Please ping me if you need more clarification. Thank you ! Thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bgvsiteadmin1 -
Alt Tags
Hi We have lots of alt tags missing, I know they'e recommended by Google, so moving forward we will ensure we add them to product images, but should we go back and update the ones we have missing? How important is it for SEO? Has anyone tested this? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Canoncial tag for Similar Product Descriptions on Woocommerce
I'm looking for advice on how to handle my product description pages for my website vinylabs.com. The website sells vinyl wrap for cars and each color of vinyl (89 variations) has it's own product page. The product descriptions will all be identical except for the color description and code. All of our competitors have an identical layout, different pages for each color, and it fits the product so I don't want to depart from featuring each color as it's own page. Here is my dilemma. I don't want to get penalized for duplicate content, however I do want individual color codes to be searchable on google. For example if you google 3M vinyl wrap M203 you'll get individual pages from the manufacturer and our competitors featuring just that color. I want our website to show up as well. I was thinking about creating a single page that has selectable colors and sizes and then using the canonical tag to point all of my individual color code pages to that single page. However won't that hurt the ability for my individual color code pages to show in search? None of my competitors are using the canonical tag to redirect to a different page. Any advice welcome! Thank you for your time.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vinylabs1 -
Organic Listings showing Google Tag Manager + Google Page Title...?
I'm a bit stumped with this. I optimise all my titles etc for Australia - and now the organic liatings are showing something strange. For example ( we sell health supplements ) Meta title = "My Product , Buy Online Australia" If I type "My Product" - the title in the organic listings says "My Product - My Company Limited" - and the only place I can see it getting that from is a combination of Meta Data used in Google Tag Manager + the Name on my Google places page. This is much more obvious for categories.. but it's a pain in the butt. If I type "My Product Australia" Then the original "My Product , Buy Online Australia" comes up. Any ideas on policy etc? I have taken the "Limited" off the Google business page - so hopefully this will change over time - but I can't find any information on why google would do something like this. If you had shed any light on this - would be much appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | s_EOgi_Bear0 -
Google Indexing Duplicate URLs : Ignoring Robots & Canonical Tags
Hi Moz Community, We have the following robots command that should prevent URLs with tracking parameters being indexed. Disallow: /*? We have noticed google has started indexing pages that are using tracking parameters. Example below. http://www.oakfurnitureland.co.uk/furniture/original-rustic-solid-oak-4-drawer-storage-coffee-table/1149.html http://www.oakfurnitureland.co.uk/furniture/original-rustic-solid-oak-4-drawer-storage-coffee-table/1149.html?ec=affee77a60fe4867 These pages are identified as duplicate content yet have the correct canonical tags: https://www.google.co.uk/search?num=100&site=&source=hp&q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.oakfurnitureland.co.uk%2Ffurniture%2Foriginal-rustic-solid-oak-4-drawer-storage-coffee-table%2F1149.html&oq=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.oakfurnitureland.co.uk%2Ffurniture%2Foriginal-rustic-solid-oak-4-drawer-storage-coffee-table%2F1149.html&gs_l=hp.3..0i10j0l9.4201.5461.0.5879.8.8.0.0.0.0.82.376.7.7.0....0...1c.1.58.hp..3.5.268.0.JTW91YEkjh4 With various affiliate feeds available for our site, we effectively have duplicate versions of every page due to the tracking query that Google seems to be willing to index, ignoring both robots rules & canonical tags. Can anyone shed any light onto the situation?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JBGlobalSEO0 -
How does Google treat Header tags now? H1s, H2s and H3s. What happens if you skip the H2?
The theme I am using now means each page on my is currently set up like this: h1> keyword phrase keyword phrase The new theme I want to use is different h1> keyword phrase Will changing the theme have a negative effect on the rankings due to losing the h2 on each page?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | brianflannery0 -
Does Bing support cross-domain canonical tag?
Hi folks, We are planning to implement a cross-domain canonical tag for a client and I'm looking for some information on bing supporting cross-domain canonical tag. Does anyone knows if there was a public announcement made by Bing or any representative about the support of this tag? Btw, the best info I've found is a Q&A here on Moz about it http://moz.com/community/q/does-bing-support-cross-domain-canonical-tags but I'm looking for a Bing information on the topic.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fabioricotta-840380 -
Wildcard Redirects & Canonical Tags
I have an interesting situation. Current URLs Example1: www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-1234.html
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NakulGoyal
www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-1234-1.html
www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-1234-1-1.html Canonical on All Above URLs:
www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-1234.html New URL:
www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-4567.html Current URLs Example2: www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-1234+10.html
www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-1234+10-1.html
www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-1234+10-1-1.html Canonical on All Above URLs:
www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-1234+10.html New URL:
www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-6789.html Current URLs Example3: www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-1234+10+5.html
www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-1234+10+5-1.html
www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-1234+10+5-1-1.html Canonical on All Above URLs:
www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-1234+10+5.html New URL:
www.domain.com/american-red-widgets-cid-6789+5.html I want to make sure all variations of the above URL redirect to the new URLs. However, as you see in Example 3, we are dealing with variables that are passed on. (+5 in this case). Question 1: What wildcard 301 redirect / regular expression can I use to tackle these ? Question 2: If we redirect www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-1234+10+5.html to www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-6789+5.html and www.domain.com/red-widgets-cid-6789+5.html contains the canonical tag www.domain.com/american-red-widgets-cid-6789+5.html, any concerns or red flags here ?0