How to deal with parameter URLs as primary internal links and not canonicals? Weird situation inside...
-
So I have a weird situation, and I was hoping someone could help. This is for an ecommerce site.
1. Parameters are used to tie Product Detail Pages (PDP) to individual categories. This is represented in the breadcrumbs for the page and the use of a categoryid. One product can thus be included in multiple categories.
2. All of these PDPs have a canonical that does not include the parameter / categoryid.
3. With very few exceptions, the canonical URL for the PDPs are not linked to. Instead, the parameter URL is to tie it to a specific category. This is done primarily for the sake of breadcrumbs it seems.
One of the big issues we've been having is the canonical URLs not being indexed for a lot of the products. In some instances, the canonicals _are _indexed alongside parameters, or just parameter URLs are indexed. It's all very...mixed up, I suppose.
My theory is that the majority of canonical URLs not being linked to anywhere on the site is forcing Google to put preference on the internal link instead. My problem?
**I have no idea what to recommend to the client (who will not change the parameter setup). **
One of our Technical SEOs recommended we "Use cookies instead of parameters to assign breadcrumbs based on how the PDP is accessed." I have no experience this.
So....yeah. Any thoughts? Suggestions?
Thanks in advance.
-
Hmmm. This is tricky. Some ideas - hope something here is helpful:
- Have you tried "inspect URL" in search console? That has information about canonical selections these days and may be helpful
- Are the canonical URLs (and no parameter URLs) included in the XML sitemap? Might be worth trying cleaning that up if there is any confusion
- Cookies could work - but it sounds to me as though that would go against your client preferences as the non-cookie version would have to remove / work without parameters I think - which you indicated they weren't prepared to do
- Failing all of that, what about picking one category to be the primary category for each product and canonicalising to that (which will have internal links) instead of to the version with no parameters? Could that work? Might nudge towards the canonical being respected
-
Sorry to hear that, it does indeed sound like an awful situation to be trapped in! I don't really see much optimism :') except if they will understand anything you do is more damage control - and that still does have value
-
Yuuuuuuuuuuup. And yeah, I'm aware that the canonical is just a directive, but they were sold on this setup before my time. So I'm basically left trying to fix an issue that simply cannot be fixed without making drastic changes. The site was built only recently - it's been live for a couple months, and this method of internal linking, categorization, etc was the recommendation from the previous SEOs. Just a crappy situation through and through.
-
Unfortunately I think that this setup sounds too complex and archaic to really give any recommendations without seeing an example of each URL type and what you want to happen with it (and why)
I know you're trying your best to explain the situation, but the archaic nature and complexity of what you are explaining mean that, without an actual example - no one is really likely to interpret the question correctly. It's not a bad question, it's not your fault - it's clearly just a complicated situation
You should know that the canonical directive is 'just a directive' and not an order to Google. If Google feels that listing another, different URL is more beneficial for its users then it will do that and ignore you. Even if you use canonical tags successfully, there is NEVER ANY GUARANTEE that the canonical URL will inherit all rankings from the previously ranking URL (so quite often, people shoot themselves in the foot by over-using canonical tags. They get 10% more control but lose 30% rankings, bad trade - think bigger)
It sounds like the architecture of the site is so archaic that in reality, any recommendations will "help the site to lose the least rankings over time until it is replaced", so it's more of a damage limiting exercise until the client decides to be reasonable
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
-
Need help in de-indexing URL parameters in my website.
Hi, Need some help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ImranZafar
So this is my website _https://www.memeraki.com/ _
If you hover over any of the products, there's a quick view option..that opens up a popup window of that product
That popup is triggered by this URL. _https://www.memeraki.com/products/never-alone?view=quick _
In the URL you can see the parameters "view=quick" which is infact responsible for the pop-up. The problem is that the google and even your Moz crawler is picking up this URL as a separate webpage, hence, resulting in crawl issues, like missing tags.
I've already used the webmaster tools to block the "view" parameter URLs in my website from indexing but it's not fixing the issue
Can someone please provide some insights as to how I can fix this?0 -
When the site's entire URL structure changed, should we update the inbound links built pointing to the old URLs?
We're changing our website's URL structures, this means all our site URLs will be changed. After this is done, do we need to update the old inbound external links to point to the new URLs? Yes the old URLs will be 301 redirected to the new URLs too. Many thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jade1 -
Base href + relative link href for canonical link
I have a site that in the head section we specify a base href being the domain with a trailing slash and a canonical link href being the relative link to the domain. <base <="" span="">href="http://www.domain.com/" /> href="link-to-page.html" rel="canonical" /> I know that Google recommends using an absolute path as a canonical link but is specifying a base href with a relative canonical link the same thing or is it still seen as duplicate content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nobody16116990439410 -
Internal Linking - Can You Over Do It?
Hi, One of the sites I'm working on has a forum with thousands of pages, amongst thousands of other pages. These pages produce lots of organic search traffic... 200,000 per month. We're using a bit of custom code to link relevant words and phrases from various discussion threads to hopefully related discussion pages. This generates thousands of links and up to 8 in-context links per page. A page could have anywhere from 200 to 3000 words in one to 50+ comments. Generally, a page with 200 words would have fewer of these automatically generated links, just because there are fewer terms naturally on the page. Is there any possible problem with this, including but not limited to some kind of internal anchor text spam or anything else? We do it to knit together pages for link juice and hopefully user experience... giving them another page to go to. The pages we link to are all our pages that produce or we hope to produce organic search traffic from. Thanks! ....Darcy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
URL Parameters Duplicate Page Title
Thanks in advance, I'm getting duplicate page titles because seomoz keeps crawling through my url parameters. I added forcefiltersupdate to the URL parameters in webmaster tools but it has not seemed to have an effect. Below is an example of the duplicate content issue that I am having. http://qlineshop.com/OC/index.php?route=product/category&path=59_62&forcefiltersupdate=true&checkedfilters[]=a.13.13.387baf0199e7c9cc944fae94e96448fa Any thoughts? Thanks again. -Patrick
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bamron0 -
Best internal linking structure?
We are considering implementing a site-wide contextual linking structure. Does anyone have some good guidelines / blog posts on this topic? Our site is quite (over 1 million pages), so the contextual linking would be automated, but we need to define a set of rules. Basically, if we have a great page on 'healthy recipes,' should we make every instance of the word 'healthy recipes' link back to that page, or should we limit it to a certain number of pages?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
301 Redirect To Corresponding Link No Matter The URL?
Hey guys I have hosting on Host Gator with I believe an apache web server. I need a code to put in the HT ACCESS to redirect all WWW URL's to their corresponding http URL. I haven't been able to get a code to work. For example, http://www.mysite.org/page1.html -> http://mysite.org/page1.html , without having to redirect hundreds of pages individually Here is the format my server uses in the HT ACCESS file for 301 redirects. RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^mysite.org$ [OR] RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^www.mysite.org
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DustinX
$RewriteRule ^Electric-Pressure-Cookers.html$ "http://mysite.org/Pressure-Cookers.html" [R=301,L] Thanks0 -
Will this internal linking feature cause canonicalization issues?
This is a canonicalization type question, so I believe it should be a pretty straightforward answer. I just haven't had much experience with using the canonical tag so I felt I should ask so I don't blow up my site 🙂 Ok, let's say I have a product page that is at: - www.exampledomain.com/products/nameofproduct Now on that page I have an option to see all of the specs of the product in a collapsible tab which I want to link to from other pages - So the URL to this tab ends from other pages ends up being: - www.exampledomain.com/products/nameofproduct?=productspecs This will link to the tab and default it to open when someone clicks that link on another page. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I understand canonicalization correctly I believe creating this link is going to cause a duplicate page that has the opportunity to be indexed and detract from our SEO to the main product page. My question is... where do I put the "rel=canonical" tag to point the SEO value back to the main page since the page is dynamically generated and doesn't have its own file on the server? - or do even need to be concerned with this? Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on any of the above. Like I said - this is something I am fairly familiar with how it works, but I haven't had much experience with using. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CodyWheeler0