Canonical URL's - Fixed but still negatively impacted
-
I recently noticed that our canonical url's were not set up correctly. The incorrect setup predates me but it could have been in place for close to a year, maybe a bit more. Each of the url's had a "sortby" parameter on all of them. I had our platform provider make the fix and now everything is as it should be.
I do see issues caused by this in Google Webmaster, for instance in the HTML suggestions it's telling me that pages have duplicate title tags when in fact this is the same page but with a variety of url parameters at the end of the url. To me this just highlights that there is a problem and we are being negatively impacted by the previous implementation.
My question is has anyone been in this situation? Is there any way to flush this out or push Google to relook at this? Or is this a sit and be patient situation.
I'm also slightly curious if Google will at some point look and see that the canonical urls were changed and then throw up a red flag even though they are finally the way they should be.
Any feedback is appreciated.
Thanks,
Dave -
In the past i have seen conanicals take up to 5-6 weeks. My only other advice is to monitor the amount of indexed queries you have in Google. If you know you started with 100+ and over the past three weeks it has dropped down to 50, then it is slowly taking affect (once again, using the site search). If you see the opposite and you notice no change, then perhaps the tag is still incorrect or some other issue?
I can't promise that all of the queried URLs will become un-indexed but the most important thing is the base page ranks the highest when searching.
-
Hi Kyle
Thanks for the response. That is a good point regarding the site:www.... search and in fact all of the results used the correct canonical url with the cached versions showing the same corrected format. The last time the sitemap was downloaded was yesterday so maybe my concern shouldn't be that great. What I'm seeing in webmaster tools does include some of the older content with the parameters but if the SERP's are showing updated versions then maybe that will be flushed out. I am just under the impression that if its in Google Webmaster then its part of Googles overall point of view of your site.
The canonical url updates have been fixed for about 3 weeks.
-
First i would check to see if the update you made to the pages have been recognized by Google. You can do this simply by doing a "site:www.domain.com" search, then view the cached page. If you find that it has not been recognized, you can always resubmit a new xml sitemap to your webmaster tools. In the past i have seen this help speed up the process.
How long ago did you make these updates?
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
-
Googlebot indexing URL's with ? queries in them. Is this Panda duplicate content?
I feel like I'm being damaged by Panda because of duplicate content as I have seen the Googlebot on my site indexing hundreds of URL's with ?fsdgsgs strings after the .html. They were beign generated by an add-on filtering module on my store, which I have since turned off. Googlebot is still indexing them hours later. At a loss what to do. Since Panda, I have lost a couple of dozen #1 rankings that I've held for months on end and had one drop over 100 positions.
On-Page Optimization | | sparrowdog0 -
Our urls for adwords are slightly different from current urls presented on site (weused htaccess to help create shorter urls). How important is it that the adwords url match the sitemap url for keywords on those pages?
Hello, We have dynamic urls that we have made into short urls through htaccess and code manipulation. Some of our adwords urls are different from our page urls - for example a) Latest version of page www.abc.com/x-y-z.html b) Previous version of url www.abc.com/x+y+z.html c) raw original version www.abc.com/yyy/zzz?category=X&Product-code=Y etc etc. Would my ranking for keywords on the page improve if I diligently made all of them the same? They all go to the same page even now, and no 404 errors or anything. Thanks Sam
On-Page Optimization | | samgold0 -
Is www. still important?
How important is the www in front of a domain name nowadays? We redesign a lot of sites and we want to focus on best practices - is it still important to include the www or redirect to shorter (non-www) url?
On-Page Optimization | | jcduron0 -
2 Question about URL structure
Hello guys 1 - I have a question about the best structure for URLs from the point of view of SEO: Is it OK to use the URL as mywebsite.com.br/long-tail-article Or is better this mywebsite.com.br/category/long-tail-article 2 - When part of my keyword is already in my "category", for example: mywebsite.com.br/digital-marketing/digital-marketing-is-good I leave it as it is, or in the following way: mywebsite.com.br/digital-marketing-is-good NOTE: Do not take into account that this URL would be different from other URLs in this category
On-Page Optimization | | seomasterbrasil0 -
Keyword density and it's impact?
How beneficial is properly optimised text on your website? I have been reading copy blogger and they seem to think it's almost the foundations and can have a massive impact - thus their software for improving optimised text. So... The way I see it, content can fit into 3 areas: 1. Over optimised - keyword stuffed 2. Produced without the keyword in mind and then small changes, maybe the keyword used once or twice within 500 words, slotted into the h1 tag. 3. Optimised - At the front of the h1 tag, density of roughly 3-4%, emphasised with bold and italic. What kind of impact can number 3 really have on rankings? If your position 7/8 could it be possible to see position movement from content changes? Cheers
On-Page Optimization | | activitysuper0 -
Disappearing Rel=Canonical Code
Hi, I've been getting a lot of rel=canonical warnings from seomoz. I went into the original pages and pasted in plain text the following code: link rel="canonical" href="http://www.example.com/blog/my-awesome-blog-post"< (the > are reversed). After a few crawls I couldn't see any effect from posting the code. When I went and checked again, it didn't stay in the wysiwyg editor. It disappeared! We are using Drupal 6. Could someone tell me what code I should be pasting? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | OTSEO0 -
Image URL's have knocked my sub-pages down (WP)
I had most of my keywords within the top 10 for this site, some were even ranking in the top 5. For a possible minor boost, more-so to cover all the bases, I decided to add images to all of the pages, and they were uploaded as a gallery with most of the image file names being the same as the keyword. Thus, url's were created with our targeted phrases, extending off of the corresponding sub-page. After that, Google quickly picked up the url's to the images and began indexing them, when that occurred the sub-page which was to be the landing page, quickly tanked. Nothing else on-site changed besides the uploading of the images, so I'm sure they're conflicting and for whatever reason Google can't decide which page to index. The page that contains the images used, or the actual intended landing page. With WP I didn't see a way to not have them link to anything at all, and just be static when using a gallery, stock at least. So, my question is how can I quickly alleviate this problem and what should I do in the future to avoid this? I believe if I change link thumbnails to image file instead of attachment page, that should fix the issue... Then, I'll have dead URL's which I suppose I should 301 to the sub-page. Alternatively, is there a better solution that will work, I was also thinking about no-indexing the attachment URL's, but that doesn't seem to be an option.
On-Page Optimization | | JayAdams320 -
No Data Available for this URL
Hi,
On-Page Optimization | | ostiguyj
I really don't understand why I have this message "No data available for this URL"
in my SEOMOZ campain. (www.bienchezsoi.ca) When I look at my page rank, I get a score of 0 I have no idea of to fix it. Please help. Thanks0