How to fix duplicate content for homepage and index.html
-
Hello,
I know this probably gets asked quite a lot but I haven't found a recent post about this in 2018 on Moz Q&A, so I thought I would check in and see what the best route/solution for this issue might be. I'm always really worried about making any (potentially bad/wrong) changes to the site, as it's my livelihood, so I'm hoping someone can point me in the right direction.
Moz, SEMRush and several other SEO tools are all reporting that I have duplicate content for my homepage and index.html (same identical page).
According to Moz, my homepage (without index.html) has PA 29 and index.html has PA 15. They are both showing Status 200. I read that you can either do a 301 redirect or add rel=canonical
I currently have a 301 setup for my http to https page and don't have any rel=canonical added to the site/page. What is the best and safest way to get rid of duplicate content and merge the my non index and index.html homepages together these days? I read that both 301 and canonical pass on link juice but I don't know what the best route for me is given what I said above.
Thank you for reading, any input is greatly appreciated!
-
OK, Paul, I hear what you are saying. It's a very open and obvious diss.
I'm not sure what you are saying makes any difference to the argument that the canonical way here is not the way to go. I was explaining in the simplest way, I would not want, and I'm sure you would not want either, a live page like this - the home page, live and canonicalised.
(It's a given that the canonical works like a 301, passing link juice to the preferred version.)
So thanks but it makes no difference - delete & 301 every time.
Google is heightening its distrust of canonicals - the new Seach Console tool reveals which pages are the preferred canonical and it's something of a surprise to SEOs!
If you feel like playing top trumps again then why not PM me? - it's so much better and the uninitiated do not need to see it!
Cheers Nigel
-
A proper canonical tag does a lot more than "just be telling Google not to rank it" When used properly (i.e. pages that truly do contain the same content), the canonicalised page passes its ranking signals back to the canonical source.
I agree with Kristina - while a 301 would be preferable (it's a directive, while canonical tags are taken as suggestions), a canonical tag would be vastly better than not doing anything about the issue. At least until the dev can get the problem with the 301-redirect properly resolved.
Paul
-
It's best practice to redirect, but if that's not an option, the canonical route should help the problem a lot! You'll probably lose some link equity with this route, but it should clear up duplicate content issues from Google's side.
-
Hi Dre
If you just do a canonical then the page will still be live, you will just be telling Google not to rank it. Best practice is to remove it all together and 301. It is bad practice having more than one version of your home page, (any page) live!
Regards Nigel
-
Thank you so much for all the responses. So it sounds like 301 redirect through htaccess is the way to go. What is the difference between using the 301 through htaccess vs using rel=canonical in my case? Does the 301 provide better link juice vs rel=canonical or is canonical just not applicable in this case? Thanks for all the replies and helpful suggestions again!
EDIT: I spoke to my developer (who is hosting and maintaining my site now).. he said he tried to do 301 through htaccess but it seems to be crashing the site (and trust me he is very good at what he does). Part of the problem is that my site is VERY old (originally build about 10 years ago and NOT updated once since).. he has been slowly updating and cleaning up the site slowly and he will try to figure out why the 301 is crashing the site and not working but in the mean time how safe is it to use rel=canonical instead of a 301?
Thanks again!
-
Hi dre
Your site really shouldn't be generating an index.html in the first place but if it is you must make sure that there is a 301 in the htaccess file sending all traffic to the single homepage URL as Lynn correctly points out this will be a permanent redirect.
It is very simple to do. Both versions are treated as separate pages (as http and https) so you are essentially showing a duplicate site to Google so your rankings will be terrible until you change.
Regards Nigel
-
Hello there,
You can use .htaccess URL rewrite to remove all the .html from your URL, here's the rewrite rules.
RewriteEngine On
RewriteRule ^index.html$ / [R=301,L]
RewriteRule ^(.*)/index.html$ /$1/ [R=301,L]Once you added this rules you should also fix all your internal links make sure they link to the URL without .html
Hope this helps,
Joseph Yap
-
"I currently have a 301 setup for my http to https page" - great! Also, you should check if your inner pages redirecting from HTTP-versions to HTTPS too.
index.html should redirect to the homepage main version with 301 Permanent Redirect.
-
Google consider HTTP and HTTPS as two separate protocols. Since the contents are same on both versions, google bots consider it as duplicate content. Adding a canonical URL will solve this problem. If you have any doubts, feel free to ask.
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
-
Would a free PDF download diminish SEO benefits of HTML content?
Hello, I am doing SEO for a company that, as a sideline business, sells four books written by the principals; the content is directly relevant to the company's primary business focus. Book sales are a tiny fraction of our overall revenue, and we don't expect that to change, although we will continue to sell the books. In addition to selling them, we have decided to convert the books to HTML and post them for free on our website (laid out by chapter and section). The hope is that this will result in goodwill, links, traffic, and ultimately improved search rankings. My question: Would offering free PDF downloads of the books (in addition to posting the HTML content) diminish the SEO benefits of the HTML content? If we don't offer the PDF option, people would have to visit our site to read the content (unless they bought a hard copy). If visitors were able to download a free PDF, they wouldn't need to return to our site to read it. If our corporate clients (nearly all of our clients are corporations) could download a PDF, they could then post it on an intranet instead of posting a link to our site. In general, do you think a visitor would be less likely to link to our site if he or she were able to download the PDF? Or would the appeal of the PDF option make it more likely that people would visit and link to the site? Also, if we offer the PDF option, are there any SEO issues related to duplicate content? Finally, if we did offer the free PDF download, would you recommend that we ask for an email address before giving the PDF? Thank you very much!
On-Page Optimization | | nyc-seo0 -
Duplicate content on domains we own
Hello! We are new to SEO and have a problem we have caused ourselves. We own two domains GoCentrix.com (old domain) and CallRingTalk.com (new domain that we want to SEO). The content was updated on both domains at about the same time. Both are identical with a few exceptions. Now that we are getting into SEO we now understand this to be a big issue. Is this a resolvable matter? At this point what is the best approach to handle this? So far we have considered a couple of options. 1. Change the copy, but on which site? Is one flagged as the original and the other duplicate? 2. Robots.txt noindex, nofollow on the old one. Any help is appreciated, thanks in advance!
On-Page Optimization | | CallRingTalk0 -
What Should I Do With Low Quality Content?
As my site has definitely got hit by Panda, I am in the process of cleaning my website of low quality content. Needless to say, shitty articles are completed being removed but I think lots of this content is now of low quality because it is obsolete and dated. So what should I do with this content? Should I rewrite those articles as completely new posts and link from the old posts to the new ones? Or should I delete the old posts and do a 301 redirect to the new post? Or should I rewrite the content of these articles in place so I can keep the old URL and backlinks? One thing is that I've got a lot more followers than I used to so publishing a new post gets a lot more views, like and shares and whatnot from social networks.
On-Page Optimization | | sbrault741 -
When to not index
We are working on a brand new site http://www.shedfinders.com/ The site has some login sections i.e. agent profiles for property agents etc, register etc. I figured what is the harm to submit all of these in sitemap and use Yoast to ensure on page is as good as it can be. If a user stumbles across any then they would be redirected back to a a register/login page. Not sure what is best practice? Laura
On-Page Optimization | | lauratagdigital0 -
tagged as duplicate content?
Hello folks, I'm new to SEOmoz . I was looking at our Crawl Diagnostics and found that some of our blog posts that have been commented on were tagged as duplicate content. For example: http://thankyouregistry.com/blog/remarriages-and-gift-registries/ http://thankyouregistry.com/blog/remarriages-and-gift-registries/comment-page-1/ I'm unsure how to fix these, so any ideas would be appreciated. Thanks a lot!
On-Page Optimization | | GiftReg0 -
Duplicate page
Just getting started and had a question regarding one of the reports. It is telling me that I have duplicate pages but I'm not sure how to resolve that.
On-Page Optimization | | KeylimeSocial0 -
Is is it true that Google will not penalize duplicated content found in UL and LI tags?
I've read in a few places now that if you absolutely have to use a key term several times in a piece of copy, then it is preferable to use li and ul tags, as google will not penalise excessive density of keywords found in these tags. Does anyone know if there is any truth in this?
On-Page Optimization | | jdjamie0 -
Magento Layered Navigation & Duplicate Content
Hello Dear SeoMoz, I would like to ask your help with something that I am not sure off. Our ecommerce web site is built with Magento. I have found many problems so far and I know that there will be many more in the future. Currently, I am trying to find the best way to deal with the duplicate content that is produced from the layered navigation (size, gender etc). I have done a lot of research so far in order to understand which might be the best practice and I found the following practices: **Block layered navigation URLSs from the Google Webmaster Tools (**Apparently this works for Google Only). Block these URLs with the robots.txt file Make links no-follow **Make links JavaScript from Magento *** Avoid including these links in the xml site map. Avoid including these link in the A-Z Product Index. Canonical tag Meta Tags (noindex, nofollow) Question If I turn the layered navigation links into JavaScript links from the Magento Admin, the layered navigation links are still found by the crawlers but they look like that: | http://www.mysite.com/# instead of: http://www.mysite.com/girls-basics.html?gender_filte... | Can these new URLS (http://www.mysite.com/# ) solve the duplicate content problems with the layered navigation or do I need to implement other practices too to make sure that everything is done right. Kind Regards Stefanos Anastasiadis
On-Page Optimization | | alexandalexaseo0