Rel: Canonical - checking advice provided by SEO agency
-
Hey all,
We have two brands one bigger and one smaller that are on 2 different domains. We are wanting to repost some of the articles from the smaller brand to the bigger brand and what was a bit of curve ball, our SEO agency advised us NOT to put a rel: canonical on the reposted articles on the bigger brands site.
This is counter to what i'm used to and just wanted to confirm with the gurus out there if this is good advice or bad advice.
Thanks
-
Hello,
When checking canonical advice from an SEO agency, ensure it aligns with best practices. Verify proper implementation, consistent URLs, and adherence to Google's guidelines to avoid potential SEO issues.
Thanks
-
"Rel: Canonical" is a meta tag used in SEO to specify the preferred version of a web page when there are multiple pages with similar or duplicate content. It helps search engines understand which page to prioritize in their rankings. When an SEO agency advises you to check "Rel: Canonical," they are suggesting that you ensure this tag is correctly implemented on your website to improve SEO and avoid content duplication issues.
(PMP Exam Prep) (project management methodologies)(Study abroad) (Canada PR)
-
The advice from your SEO agency not to use rel="canonical" on reposted articles from the smaller brand to the bigger brand is unusual but not necessarily bad. Rel="canonical" is typically used to signal the preferred version of duplicate content. In this case, they might be suggesting that the content should exist separately on both sites without indicating a preference for one over the other. It's essential to discuss this strategy with your SEO agency in more detail to understand their reasoning and how it aligns with your overall SEO and content strategy.
(Canada PR) ( list of documents required for Canada PR from India) (PMP Exam Prep) (Study abroad)
-
@Zehlm said in Rel: Canonical - checking advice provided by SEO agency:
@Redooo
Use rel canonical tag for indexing
Always use a rel canonical tag for indexing. For example if there is a rel canonical tag for: https://www.zehlm.com and I also want other pages showing up in search, then a rel canonical tag for: https://www.zehlm.com/seo.html would also be appropriate. The rel canonical tag should match the url of the page. If the rel canonical tag is omitted then it's visibility will be affected.
Omitting the canonical tag usually will diminish visibility on the page it is missing on because it takes away from the SEO score. Sacrificing the SEO score may not be the best decision if you still need the page visible in SERP. -
The advice you received from your SEO agency regarding the use of rel=canonical tags for reposted articles has generated a legitimate point of consideration. Let's break down the situation:
-
Rel=Canonical Purpose: The rel=canonical tag is primarily used to indicate the preferred version of a webpage when there are duplicate or very similar content across multiple URLs. It helps search engines understand which version to prioritize in their index to prevent duplicate content issues.
-
Reposting Content: When you repost articles from the smaller brand to the bigger brand, there's a potential for duplicate content if both versions exist on different domains. Using rel=canonical tags can help mitigate this issue by indicating the original source of the content.
However, there could be scenarios where using rel=canonical might not be the best approach:
-
Different Branding or Context: If the content is being reposted to the bigger brand but needs to maintain its own identity or context, using a rel=canonical might not be appropriate. Canonical tags suggest that one version is the same as another, which might not be true in this case.
-
Valuable Independent Content: If the reposted content is intended to stand alone and provide unique value to the bigger brand's audience, it might be more suitable to keep it as a separate piece without canonical tags.
-
Cross-Promotion Benefits: Reposting content from the smaller brand to the bigger brand could potentially be seen as cross-promotion or strategic content sharing. In such cases, you might not want to canonicalize the content, as each brand's website could benefit from its presence.
Given these considerations, the advice from your SEO agency might make sense if the reposted content is intended to serve a distinct purpose on the bigger brand's website. However, it's always a good idea to discuss the specifics with your SEO agency and get a clear understanding of their rationale behind this recommendation. They should be able to provide insights tailored to your brands' unique goals and the nature of the content being reposted.
Remember, SEO is often contextual, and what works for one situation might not be ideal for another. Always prioritize the user experience and providing valuable, unique content to your audience while making informed decisions about canonicalization based on your specific scenario.
-
-
@Redooo
Use rel canonical tag for indexing
Always use a rel canonical tag for indexing. For example if there is a rel canonical tag for: https://www.zehlm.com and I also want other pages showing up in search, then a rel canonical tag for: https://www.zehlm.com/seo.html would also be appropriate. The rel canonical tag should match the url of the page. If the rel canonical tag is omitted then it's visibility will be affected. -
Para que quieres poner un rel canonical de un sitio totalmente diferente a otro. No tiene sentido. Deberías de spinear el texto para que no genere contenido duplicado y copiado.
Un saludo.
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
-
What Tools Should I Use To Investigate Damage to my website
I would like to know what tools I should use and how to investigate damage to my website in2town.co.uk I hired a person to do some work to my website but they damaged it. That person was on a freelance platform and was removed because of all the complaints made about them. They also put in backdoors on websites including mine and added content. I also had a second problem where my content was being stolen. My site always did well and had lots of keywords in the top five and ten, but now they are not even in the top 200. This happened in January and feb. When I write unique articles, they are not showing in Google and need to find what the problem is and how to fix it. Can anyone please help
Technical SEO | | blogwoman10 -
Page Indexing without content
Hello. I have a problem of page indexing without content. I have website in 3 different languages and 2 of the pages are indexing just fine, but one language page (the most important one) is indexing without content. When searching using site: page comes up, but when searching unique keywords for which I should rank 100% nothing comes up. This page was indexing just fine and the problem arose couple of days ago after google update finished. Looking further, the problem is language related and every page in the given language that is newly indexed has this problem, while pages that were last crawled around one week ago are just fine. Has anyone ran into this type of problem?
Technical SEO | | AtuliSulava1 -
these sites where you have to pay to generate backlinks?
After opening a site here, we created a post containing a backlink and discovered a company with a top exposure. After opening the site in the same way, I created a post that included a backlink, but after a few days my account was suspended. By any chance, are these sites where you have to pay to generate backlinks? Of course, each site has a different policy, but my account is suspended every time.
SEO Tactics | | znjfl
Please reply if you have experienced anything similar to mine.0 -
Dynamic Canonical Tag for Search Results Filtering Page
Hi everyone, I run a website in the travel industry where most users land on a location page (e.g. domain.com/product/location, before performing a search by selecting dates and times. This then takes them to a pre filtered dynamic search results page with options for their selected location on a separate URL (e.g. /book/results). The /book/results page can only be accessed on our website by performing a search, and URL's with search parameters from this page have never been indexed in the past. We work with some large partners who use our booking engine who have recently started linking to these pre filtered search results pages. This is not being done on a large scale and at present we only have a couple of hundred of these search results pages indexed. I could easily add a noindex or self-referencing canonical tag to the /book/results page to remove them, however it’s been suggested that adding a dynamic canonical tag to our pre filtered results pages pointing to the location page (based on the location information in the query string) could be beneficial for the SEO of our location pages. This makes sense as the partner websites that link to our /book/results page are very high authority and any way that this could be passed to our location pages (which are our most important in terms of rankings) sounds good, however I have a couple of concerns. • Is using a dynamic canonical tag in this way considered spammy / manipulative? • Whilst all the content that appears on the pre filtered /book/results page is present on the static location page where the search initiates and which the canonical tag would point to, it is presented differently and there is a lot more content on the static location page that isn’t present on the /book/results page. Is this likely to see the canonical tag being ignored / link equity not being passed as hoped, and are there greater risks to this that I should be worried about? I can’t find many examples of other sites where this has been implemented but the closest would probably be booking.com. https://www.booking.com/searchresults.it.html?label=gen173nr-1FCAEoggI46AdIM1gEaFCIAQGYARS4ARfIAQzYAQHoAQH4AQuIAgGoAgO4ArajrpcGwAIB0gIkYmUxYjNlZWMtYWQzMi00NWJmLTk5NTItNzY1MzljZTVhOTk02AIG4AIB&sid=d4030ebf4f04bb7ddcb2b04d1bade521&dest_id=-2601889&dest_type=city& Canonical points to https://www.booking.com/city/gb/london.it.html In our scenario however there is a greater difference between the content on both pages (and booking.com have a load of search results pages indexed which is not what we’re looking for) Would be great to get any feedback on this before I rule it out. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | GAnalytics1 -
Unsolved SEO And Digital Marketing Training
Hi Everyone, I have a basic SEO and Digital Marketing knowledge and looking for a course /training which will teach me step by step SEO and tools need to use with hand on training. I have a website (https://gemslearninginstitute.com/) which I need bring in Google Packs and on the first page of Google. I have attended a few courses but none of them offered in depth knowledge with hands on training so whatever I do it is not producing results. Thanks
SEO Tactics | | fslpso0 -
SEO url best practices
We're revamping our site architecture and making several services pages that are accessible from one overarching service page. An example would be as follows: Services Student Services Essay editing Essay revision Author Services Book editing Manuscript critique We'll also be putting breadcrumbs throughout the site for easy navigation, however, is it imperative that we build the URLs that deep? For example, could we simply have www.site.com/essay-editing rather than www.site.com/services/students/essay-editing? I prefer the simplicity of the former, but I feel the latter may be more "search robot friendly" and better for SEO. Any advice on this is much appreciated.
Technical SEO | | Kibin0 -
Rel=Canonical, WWW vs non WWW and SEO
Okay so I'm a bit of a loss here. For what ever reason just about every single Wordpress site I has will turn www.mysite.com into mysite.com in the browser bar. I assume this is the rel=canonical tag at work, there are no 301s on my site. When I use the Open Site Explorer and type in www.mysite.com it shows a domain authority of around 40 and a few hundred backlinks... and then I get the message. Oh Hey! It looks like that URL redirects to XXXXXX. Would you like to see data for <a class="clickable redirects">that URL instead</a>? So if I click to see this data instead I have less than half of that domain authority and about 2 backlinks. *** Does this make a difference SEO wise? Should my non WWW be redirecting to my WWW instead because that's where the domain authority and backlinks are? Why am I getting two different domain authority and backlink counts if they are essentially the same? Or am I wrong and all that link juice and authority passes just the same?
Technical SEO | | twilightofidols0 -
Canonicals for Real Estate
A real estate site has a landing page for a particular zip code: site.com/zip/99999 On this page, there are links which add arguments to the URL, resulting in structures like this: site.com/zip/99999?maxprice=1000000&maxbeds=3 My question is on using a canonical URL for the pages with arguments. These pages may have lots of duplicate content, so should I direct search engines back to the base URL for the search? (site.com/zip/99999) A side note is that these pages with arguments could have no listings returned (no listings found) or could come back with listings (then it wouldn't be duplicate), but that can change on a day to day basis.
Technical SEO | | SteveCastaneda0