Is the www and non www isue realy seen by Google as duplicate content?
-
I realy don't understand how Google could posibly devaluate a link because the site displays the same content with www and without www. I mean did somebody recently saw a devaluation of a domain because of this isue? I somehow can not belive this because it is the standard when geting a new webspace that the new website display the same content with and without www.
Is a redirect realy necessary?
-
Google maay be able to work out what version you want to go with, but is it the same one that bing and other SE's will go with, and then you have the problem with www and non www links, one will be redirect to the other somehow and will leak a bit of link juice. its better that when some one copies your url its always the same.
I prefer the non www. because www is unessasry, i believe its an old unix thing, not needed today. If you have a long domain name www makes it just that much more confusing
-
Google is very good at figuring out that www and non www versions are the same site - so content duplication will not be an issue (this happens too often for them not to handle properly). One advantage you do have is consolidation of yoru link juice towards the same canonical version and therefore achieving better results. Set your preference in Google Webmaster Tools to a choice and stick to it - everywhere - even in your email signatures and printed material.
As far as www goes we've purposely dropped it and went with non-www, I personally think www is silly and meaningless however this means we have to from time to time police and correct how webmasters write down and link our URL and ask for www removal if found. Not too hard if you monitor yoru brand via Google Alerts.
-
Better have www. instead of without. Uniformity has always been an issue
-
Hi Michael,
Now a days Google is really Google at figuring out what version of the website you want to go with but with that said, isn't really that hard of a thing to fix. I'd say that as long as all your internal links are consistent in pointing to the same version, then you shouldn't have anything to worry about. In the long run of things, by making the redirect you won't see this huge bump in rankings but it is a standard practice that is done.
Casey
-
better safe then sorry.
I did look around for some time to get the answer to the same question and since no one could get a straight answer and even google webmaster tool has the option for ww or non www I think is better to get the 301 redirect.
Anyway - is just an opinion.
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
-
Do we need to worry about internal duplicate content?
Hi, I have a question about internal duplicate content. We have a catalogue of around 4000 products. Most of these do have individual descriptions but for most of the products they contain a generic summary that includes a sentence to begin with that includes each product name. We're currently working on descriptions for each product, but as you can imagine it's quite a chore. I was wondering if there are actually any penalties for this or whether we can ignore the crawl errors from the moz report? Thanks in Advance!
On-Page Optimization | | 10dales0 -
Internal Duplicate Content/Canonical Issue/ or nothing to worry about
Unfortunately, my developer cannot give me an answer to this so I really do hope someone can help. The homepage of my website is http://www.laddersfree.co.uk however I also have a page http://www.laddersfree.co.uk/index.php that has a page rank and essentially duplicates the home page. Does someone know what this is? Do I need to get my developer to do a 404? It is worrying that he has not come back to me. Thanks Jason
On-Page Optimization | | gymmad0 -
Duplicate Page Titles in Crawl Errors (although Google is rewriting in serps ??)
Hi Im working on a client/project and crawl report is showing thousands of dupe page titles In the case of the blog/news section its aprox 50 since aprox 50 posts and they all have the same meta-title: "Brand News | Brand" as opposed to: "Title Unique to Page/Topic/KW Relating to Content | Brand" Since these are the main content pages we want to rank (in addition to the main site category pages) then i have instructed dev must prioritise populating these pages meta-titles with the actual post/article titles, as per the latter version of the above example. (I should mention that i have requested they fix all dupe titles but main content pages are the priority). Whilst this will reduce the number of dupe titles in crawl error/warning report which is a good thing, is it actually likely to increase the ranking of these news/content pages given that Google does seem to be rewriting the titles correctly in the serps based on the page content ? Many Thanks in advance for your input
On-Page Optimization | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
Duplicate Content
Part of a site I am working on, features many different bags in all thicknesses colors and sizes. I'm getting an error when some pages have different content like different thicknesses. The only differences between the pages are a single digit - but in trash bags that makes it a whole different product! I can't do a canonical because it's not the same. For example: http://www.plasticplace.net/index.php?file=productdetail&iprod_id=274 and http://www.plasticplace.net/index.php?file=productdetail&iprod_id=268 Any ideas?
On-Page Optimization | | EcomLkwd0 -
Google rel hell
So apologies in advance for this question, but: Can someone explain whether as a site we should be using the "rel author" tag or the "rel publisher" tag? 1. We don't really need to distinguish between the people who write our content. 2. We definitely do need to establish ownership of our content, as unfortunately it has been widely copied. We are spending quite a bit of time filing DMCA notices. 3. Do we need to apply either tag to every page? Or does "del publisher" just need to be applied to the homepage to cover the rest of the site? 4. What looks better in the search results? - a person's face or a company logo? If prefer a face, but understand we need to promote our brand. Thanks P
On-Page Optimization | | dexm100 -
My website is saying I have duplicate page content and page title. How do I fix it?
Hi, I created a website on webstarts.com. After I launched it then ran a scan through SEO it says I have duplicate page content and page title. The 2 pages it is reading are technically the same page. www.mobilemowermedicsinc.com and www.mobilemowermedicsinc.com/index . I am unsure how to get rid of on of these as it keeps saying this is an error in the SEO scan. Could someone please advise me of what to do from here. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | bcarp880 -
Can duplicate content issues be solved with a noindex robot metatag?
Hi all I have a number of duplicate content issues arising from a recent crawl diagnostics report. Would using a robots meta tag (like below) on the pages I don't necessarily mind not being indexed be an effective way to solve the problem? Thanks for any / all replies
On-Page Optimization | | joeprice0 -
Should H1s be used in the logo? If they are and it is dynamic on each page to relate to the page content, is this detrimental to the site rather than having it in the page content?
On some sites, the H1 is contained within the logo and remains consistent throughout the site (i.e. the company name is in the of the logo). If the h1 in a logo is dynamic for each page (i.e. on the homepage it is company name - homepage) is this better or worse to have it changed out on the logo rather than having it in the page content?
On-Page Optimization | | CabbageTree0