Canonical tag - but Title and Description are slightly different
-
I am building a new SEO site with a "Silo" / Themed architecture. I have a travel website selling hotel reservations. I list a hotel page under a city page - example, www.abc.com/Dallas/Hilton.html Then I use that same property under a segment within the city - example www.abc.com/Dallas/Downtown/Hilton.html, so there are two URLs with the same content
Both pages are identical, except I want to customize the Title and Description. I want to customize the title and description to build a consistent theme - for example the /Downtown/Hilton page will have the words "Near Downtown" in the Title and Description, while the primary city Hilton page will not. So I have two questions about this.
-
First, is it okay to use a canonical tag if the Title and Description are slightly different? Everything else is identical.
-
If so, will Google crawl and comprehend the unique Title and Description on the "Downtown" silo?
I want Google to see that I have several "supporting" pages to my main landing page(s). I want to present to Google 5 supporting pages in each silo that each has a supporting keyword theme. But I'm not sure if Google will consider content of pages that point to a different page using the canonical tag.
Please see this supporting example: http://d.pr/i/aQPv
Thanks for your insights.
Rob
-
-
Kurt,
Just wanted to let you know, I decided to go with option 1 above. This is the long route, but the purest form of SEO. It will cost me more money up front, and will take time to develop, but I think its our best bet for the long run.
Thanks again for your help. I understand the canonical tag better now.
Rob
-
Kurt,
Thanks again for your insights. I appreciate you taking the time to comprehend my question so thoroughly. I am still learning this, and its good to get your input. I am leaning toward doing this without a canonical tag. I still feel that by adding the canonical tag it should send a clear signal to Google that I'm not trying to manipulate the results, as I'm effectively removing those pages from the index. But if they "think" (and thats all that matters) I'm trying something wrong, then its probably not worth it.
I'll have to think about what my best course of action is, as this will have a big impact on how I proceed.
Thanks again for your input. I do appreciate it.
Best,
Rob
-
The canonical tag is telling Google to treat that canonical URL as the URL you want them to consider for the content. It can be used to give credit when you use someone else's content, point Google to the page you want them to list when you have duplicates of your own content, or assist in moving pages from one URL to another (adding a 301 redirect later) Honestly, I've never heard of someone trying to do what you are suggesting. I'm not sure exactly how Google would treat that.
As to whether Google would consider what you're doing as spam, it's a matter of degrees. If you're doing it a lot, then it's possible they might apply a manual action. If it's not enough to warrant an action, they may just disregard all but one of the duplicate versions of each page. Maybe nothing will happen and Google won't notice. What I can tell you is that they would consider it manipulation if they notice it.
The simple fact is this. You could just have one version of the supporting pages and link to that one version from each of the relevant main pages. There are only two reasons you'd want different versions of the supporting pages. Either you want to hone the content to get the best conversion rate from users, in which case each page wouldn't actually be duplicate, or you want to manipulate the search rankings by creating a bunch of duplicates of the exact same page to target different keywords. Clearly, since you don't want to work on the content of each version, you are solely doing this to manipulate the search rankings when the same user experience could be achieved with one copy of the page.
Please also understand that this isn't personal. I don't have a problem with what you're doing. Just be aware that it comes with risks. If Google discovers it, they may treat a bunch of your pages as duplicates and may even penalize your site and you be back in the forums in a few months asking how to deal with the fact that your rankings just disappeared overnight. You just have to decide if your willing to take that risk.
-
One more thought.
I could see Google seeing my strategy as manipulation - trying to rank the same piece of content for multiple keywords if I didn't have a canonical tag on the page.
But if I reference one page and designate it as canonical I would think that removes the spam aspect. Do you agree with this?
What I'm not sure about though is how does Google read a page with a canonical tag on it. Will they ignore the unique title and description - and I lose the "supporting" pages on my other silos.
I appreciate your inputs on this - and i'm not trying to argue, just hoping (maybe in vain) I can find an alternative to the 2 options you present above.
Best,
Rob
-
Thanks for your response Kurt.
This is slowly coming to me. But if I have five duplicate versions of a hotel property page, and reference one of them as canonical, I would be fine if Google disregarded the other 4 as I only need to rank for one of those pages.
What I do want to accomplish though, is get a ranking boost for the main page in the silo(s). I'm hoping that the supporting pages (which are duplicates and have a canonical tag on them) will provide some lift to the top level page in the silo.
Example: keyword "hotels in downtown Dallas" www.abc.com/hotels-in-dallas/downtown/ to get a boost from supporting pages which also have the term "near downtown Dallas" in their title / description.
Are you saying that Google will not even recognize the unique title / description of the property pages below - because they have a canonical tag referencing a different page?
If that is the case, then you are right, I am left with the two options you give above. I don't really like either scenario as option 1 is a lot more work and money, and option 2 really dilutes my theme. Are you sure that Google considers what I want to do as spam - even though its completely legit? Just want to double check.
Best,
Rob
-
Hi Rob,
I understand what you're trying to do and why; however, you need to understand that it's something the search engines (Google in particular) don't like. Creating a bunch of duplicate pages to try to target different, similar keywords is considered manipulation, even if each of those keywords are relevant. The search engines want unique content for different pages.
In regards to the canonical tag, the pages don't have to be completely exact to use the canonical tag. After all, it's recommended that if one site uses content from another, they use the canonical tag to give the original site credit. But there will be lots of different content on the two pages since they'll have unique headers, navigation menus, footers, and possibly title and description tags. However, using canonical tags the way you are suggesting will defeat your own purpose. If you have 5 different duplicate versions of the page and setup canonical tags on each to point to one of them, Google is only going to consider that one page. The others will most likely be disregarded. Thus, you still won't get the rankings boost for the optimized title and description tags on the other duplicate versions.
It seems to me you have two options that don't run afowl of Google.
- Create different pages for each silo and have unique content for each of those pages. Not only does this give the search engines what they want, but you have more opportunity to optimize the content for the keywords you are targeting. Of course it will take a lot more work.
- Have only one version of each page, but optimize it for each of the targeted keywords. This is probably less effective since the optimization will get diluted by targeting so many keywords in the content, but it will be a lot less work.
Kurt Steinbrueck
OurChurch.Com -
Thanks Federico,
I think I understand what your recommending. I just have one more thing to clarify.
I plan to build landing pages for a variety of city hotel related terms such as:
"hotels in Dallas"
"hotels in downtown Dallas"
"hotels with suites in Dallas"
"three star hotels in Dallas"
"hotels with pools in Dallas"Its quite possible that one hotel fits in all of those silos. So my thought was I would write content for a property one time, and re-use that page in multiple silos. I am not trying to mislead search engines, just optimizing for a variety of "facts" about that property.
I know the canonical tag can be used across domains, so I'm assuming its fine to use it here, even though there is a slight variation in the Title and Description. What I don't know is whether or not Google will read a page when it encounters a canonical tag, or does it simply stop at that point, and reference the root page. I'm hoping that I can build a consistently themed silo - all pages with a common keyword. Given that Google allows users to navigate to the URL of pages that have a canonical tag on them, I'm hoping that Google sees that content, and recognizes me as a subject matter expert.
If I can't use the canonical tag, then I would be forced to write different content multiple times for the same property page...
Thanks for your advice on this.
Rob
-
Hi Rob,
I personally wouldn't go the way you are heading... that could be seen by Google as a technique to manipulate search engine results (which you stated it is).
But to respond to your question, why don't you use the "definitive" version of the page as the canonical? If the one including "near downtown" is the most accurate (and complete one as I guess the hotel IS near downtown) then you should go with that and noindex the alternatives... although I know that's not your intention, that is the way it should be done.
Hope that helps!
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
-
How much is the importance of grammar and formation of sentence in Meta Title and Description in SEO
We are having, say around 100 products, cakes to be specific, with different flavors, available in more than 100000 areas of 200 plus cities. Now to make it SEO friendly, we have an algorithm which creates a unique page for each cake name, with area name, and few keywords, so that if customer is searching for cake delivery in any specific area of specific city, the user will easily find the right page. Now the thing is - when creating such unique pages for different combinations of cake, city and areas, it is also creating some content. So we wanted to know how much is the importance given to Grammatically correct statement compared to incorrect statement in ranking a page. for example: there is 1Kg Chocolate Cake, available in Satellite Area of Ahmedabad city, which one of the following Page title will have higher ranking? Case A: Send 1Kg chocolate cake to satellite area ahmedabad online Case B: Online 1kg Chocolate Cake delivery in Satellite Ahmedabad In Case A: the statement contains all keywords, but there are some grammatical mistakes in formation of statement as well as Capital Characters are not used for Satellite (Area name) and Ahmedabad (City name) In Case B: the statement is grammatical proper, as well as capital characters are used for Area name and City name. Does all search engine also have their algorithm designed to analyze the grammatical structure of page title or it just scans the keywords? Thanks in advance. Team Midnightcake
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | midnightcake1 -
Does we need to add a canonical tag with the mobile url in each desktop version as a result of mobile first index?
Hi, Does we need to add a canonical tag with the mobile url in each desktop version as a result of mobile first index? Thanks Roy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kadut0 -
Long Title Tags
Hi guys, We have product e-commerce title tags which are over 60 characters - around 80 plus. The reason we added them in there is to incorporate
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seowork214
more information for Google. The format of these title tags are: Name + Colour + Rug Type + Origin Name = for people searching for the name of the rug
Color = people searching for a specific color
Type = The type of rug (e.g. normal or designer)
Origin = Where the rug is for. So this title will cover people searching for: People searching for designer rugs, the specific colour and also where it comes from. This then results in the title tag going way over 60 characters - around 80-90 characters. -- Would it be wise to try and shrink it down to under 60 characters, and what would be a good approach to do this? Cheers.0 -
Href Lang & Canonical Tags
Hi I have 2 issues appearing on my site audit, for a number of pages. I don't think I actually have an issue but just want to make sure. Using this page as an example - http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/0-5-l-capacity-round-safety-can-149p210 The errors I get are: 1. Conflicting hreflang and rel=canonical Canonical page points to a different language URL - when using href & canonicals, it states I need a self referential canonical . The page above is a SKU page, so we include a canonical back to the original model page so we don't get lots of duplicate content issues. Our canonical will point to - http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/justrite-round-safety-cans 2. No self referencing hreflang. Are these big issues? I'd think the bigger issue would be if I add self referencing canonicals and end up with lots of duplicate content. Any advice would be much appreciated 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Are ALL CAPS construed as spamming if they are used in a meta description tag call to action?
I know this seems like an old school question. As a long time SEO I would never use ALL CAPS in a title tag (unless a brand name is capitalized). However I recently came across a Moz video about creating better calls to action in the meta description tags. Some of the examples had CTAs that were using all caps (i.e. CALL NOW! or LOWEST QUOTES!) I realize there is a debate about the user experience implications. However I'm more concerned about search engines penalizing websites that are using ALL CAPS CTAs in their meta description tags. Any feedback/advice would be appreciated. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RosemaryB0 -
Duplicate meta descriptions
Hi All Does having quite a few Duplicate meta descriptions hurt SEO. I am worried that I have too many and thinking this could be the reason for my recent drop in search visibility. Thanks in Advance. Andy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Andy-Halliday0 -
Canonical Tags?
I read that Google will "honor" these tags if your website has two url's with duplicate content. The duplicate content does not show up in my SEOmoz crawls report but they do in the search engines and many of "non authoritative links" that are generated from my search feature j(ugly url's with % ...not real user friendly) are ranking higher than the "good URL" links. So if I do the canonical tags I guess my higher ranking bad urls will drop. I even read that google might even completely overlook the links. I read somewhere that the best way to do this is with a 301 redirect...is that correct? I m ranking pretty good with my main keyword terms so I am afraid to make changes not knowing the effect. Any suggestions? Thanks, Boo
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Boodreaux0 -
Alternative to rel canonical?
Hello there, we have a problem. Let's say we have a website www.mainwebsite.com Then you have 40 websites like this: www.retailer1.mainwebsite.com www.retailer2.mainwebsite.com www.retailer3.mainwebsite.com www.retailer4.mainwebsite.com www.retailer5.mainwebsite.com www.retailer6.mainwebsite.com … an so on In order to avoid the duplicate content penalty from Google we've added a rel="canonical" in each 40 sub-websites mapping each page of them to www.mainwebsite.com Our issue is that now, all our retailers (each owner of www.retailer-X.mainwebsite.com) are complaining about the fact that they are disappeared from Google. How can we avoid to use rel="canonical" in the sub-website and not being penalised by Google for duplicate content in www.mainwebsite.com? Many thanks, all your advices are much appreciated. YESdesign team
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | YESdesign0