Duplicate content warning: Same page but different urls???
-
Hi guys i have a friend of mine who has a site i noticed once tested with moz that there are 80 duplicate content warnings, for instance
Page 1 is http://yourdigitalfile.com/signing-documents.html
the warning page is http://www.yourdigitalfile.com/signing-documents.html
another example
Page 1 http://www.yourdigitalfile.com/
same second page http://yourdigitalfile.com
i noticed that the whole website is like the nealry every page has another version in a different url?, any ideas why they dev would do this, also the pages that have received the warnings are not redirected to the newer pages you can go to either one???
thanks very much
-
Thanks Tim. Do you have any examples of what those problems might be? With such a large catalog managing those rel canonical tags will be difficult (I don't even know if the store allows them, it's a hosted store solution and little code customization is allowed).
-
Hi there AspenFasteners, in this instance rather than a .HTAccess rule I would suggest applying a rel canonical tag which points to the page you deem as the original master source.
Using the robots to try and hide things could potentially cause you more issues as your categories may struggle to be indexed correctly.
-
We have a similar problem, but much more complex to handle as we have a massive catalog of 80,000 products and growing.
The problem occurs legitimately because our catalog is so large that we offer different navigation paths to the same content.
http://www.aspenfasteners.com/Self-Tapping-Sheet-Metal-s/8314.htm
http://www.aspenfasteners.com/Self-Tapping-Sheet-Metal-s/8315.htm
(If you look at the "You are here" breadcrumb trail, you will see the subtle differences in the navigation paths, with 8314.htm, the user went through Home > Screws, with 8315.htm, via Home > Security Fasteners > Screws).
Our hosted web store does not offer us htaccess, so I am thinking of excluding the redundant navigation points via robots.txt.
My question: is there any reason NOT to do this?
-
Oh ok
The only reason i was thinking it is duplicate content is the warnings i got on the moz crawl, see below.
75 Duplicate Page Content
6 4xx Client Error
5 Duplicate Page Title
44 Missing Meta Description Tag
5 Title Element is Too Short
I have found over 80 typos, grammatical errors, punctuation errors and incorrect information which was leading me to believe the quality of the work and their attention to detail was rather bad, which is why i thought this was a possibility.
Thanks again for your time its really appreciated
-
I wouldn't say that they have created two pages, it is just that because you have two versions of the domain and not set a preferred version that you are getting it indexing twice. .HTaccess changes are under the hood of the website and could have simply been an oversight.
-
Hey Tim
Thanks for your answer. It's really weird, other than lazyness on the devs part not to remove old or previous versions of pages?, have you any idea why they would create multiple versions of the same page with different url's?? is there any legit reason like ones severs mobile or something??
Just wondering thanks for replying
-
OK, so in this instance the only issue you have is that you need to choose your preferred start point - www or non www.
I would add a bit of code to your htaccess file to point to your preferred choice. I personally prefer a www. domain. Something like the below would work.
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^example.com$
RewriteRule (.*) http://www.example.com/$1 [R=301,L]As your site is already indexed I would also for the time being and as more of a safety measure add canonicals to the pages that point to the www. version of your site.
Also if you have a Google Search Console account, you can select your prefered domain prefix in there. this will again help with your indexation.
Hopefully I have covered most things.
Cheers
Tim
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
-
URL masking
Hi all, Within my organization we maintain a bunch of websites, say child1.com, child2.com and child3.com. It was recently suggested that we merge all three into a single one, say mother.com. The marketing community within my organization strongly argued against this, mainly due to risks related to brand awareness, rank and traffic loss for each of these websites. But we resigned to the idea that we must do it, so we started considering the next proper steps. Now, my understanding is that setting up redirects is crucial in order to cushion the fall and mitigate the losses. However, some people are suggesting url masking. To me personally, url masking doesn't sound like a white hat practice, maybe it's borderline grey, but the bottom line is I need some advice on this topic. Could someone kindly address the following: 1. How is url masking different from url redirect? 2. Is url masking different from url cloaking? 3. Would google penalize us for implementing url masking? 4. Would that have any impact on our PPC campaigns? 5. Are there any documented cases of successful and google-sanctioned websites that are actively using url masking? 6. Are there any pitfalls to using this strategy? Thank you
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SimonaCretu0 -
Google suddenly stops ranking a page for a "keyword" with same "keyword" in title tag. Low competition.
Hi all, We have released our next version of product called like "software 11", which have thousands of searches every month. So we have just added this same keyword "software 11" as page title suffix to one of the top ranking pages. Obviously this is the page has been added suddenly with "software 11" at page title, multiple header tags and 1 mention in paragraph. Google ranked it for 2 days and suddenly stopped showing this page in entire results for the same keyword we optimised the page for. Why does it happened? Does Google think that we are overdoing with this page and ignoring it? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vtmoz0 -
One page sites
HI Guys, I need help with a one page site What is the best method to getting the lower pages indexed? Linking back to the site(Deeplinking) is looking impossible. Will this hurt my SEO? Are there any other tips on one page websites that you can recommend?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Johnny_AppleSeed0 -
Glossary pages - keyword stuffing danger?
I've put together a glossary of terms related to my industry that have SEO value and am planning on building out a section on our site with unique pages for each term. However, most of these terms have synonyms or are highly similar to other valuable terms. If I were to make a glossary, and on each page (that will have high-quality, valuable, and accurate definitions and more), wrote something like "{term}, also commonly referred to as {synonym}, {synonym}," would I run the risk of keyword stuffing penalties? My only other idea beyond creating a glossary with separate pages defining each synonym is to use schema.org markup to add synonyms to the HTML of the page, but that could be seen as even more grey-hat type keyword stuffing. I guess one other option would be to work the synonyms into the definition so that the presence of the keyword reads more organically. Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | alecfwilson0 -
International web site - duplicate content?
I am looking at a site offering different language options via a javascript drop down chooser. Will google flag this as duplicate content? Should I recommend the purchase of individual domains for each country? i.e. .uk
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | bakergraphix_yahoo.com1 -
301 domain name URL variants for canonicalization question in htaccess?
#1 RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^xyz.com [NC] RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.xyz.com/$1 [L,R=301] What I want to do here is to redirect URLs that have omitted the “www.” prefix to the full “www.xyz.com” home page URL. That means the home page URL http://xyz.com will not resolve on its own, but instead will redirect to http://www.xyz.com (without trailing slash). #2 RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} ^[A-Z]{3,9}\ /([^/]+/)*(default|index).(html|php|htm)\ HTTP/ [NC] RewriteRule ^(([^/]+/)*)(default|main|index).(html|php|htm)$ http://www.xyz.com/$1 [L,R=301] What I want to do here is to ensure that any home page URL that includes several versions of explicit page name references, such as default.htm or index.html, will be redirected to the canonical home page URL, http://www.xyz.com (without trailing slash). Are the rewrite rules correct? Thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | esiow20130 -
Include placename in URL, or not?
Hi Mozzers, I'm wondering whether to put placename in URL or not. This is for a hotel so it's very focused on the county. I have loads of sub pages along the lines of www.hotelname.com/short-breaks-somerset www.hotelname.com/eat-out-somerset and so on but I was wondering whether that placename element would help or hinder. For example, may want to rank for short breaks in other searches (not just those seeking short breaks in Somerset) and was wondering whether the somerset bit may actually hinder this in the future. Also noticed Somerset is mentioned in nearly all of the page urls through the site. Perhaps this is a bit spammy and just not neccesary. I can include the address of the hotel on every page anyway. What do you think? Thanks in advance for your help 🙂 Luke
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Does Google+ make a huge difference?
I run a website that's been ranked well for good keywords related to our business for some time. It was founded back in 2007 and has been there a while. Recently a new site has popped up that ranks brilliantly for everything. It's a new site, and the only redeeming factor I can see is that it has an AddThis box showing the Facebook Likes and Google Plus Ones, and they are around 400 Facebook Likes and 80 Google+ (for every page that ranks). Any other pages on their site which doesn't have any Facebook likes or Google Plus Ones, they don't rank. Our site doesn't have any likes or pluses. Is this making the difference? I stress that other than this our sites are very similar, other than the fact we've been around over 5 years.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | freebetinfo0