Both links with ".html" and without are working , Is that a problem ?
-
Default format of my url ending with ".html" , I know it's not a problem .. But both links with ".html" and without are working , Is that critical problem or not ? and how to solve it ?
-
If the canonical tag is on the page, despite the fact the page loads in either version only the one that you have in your canonical tag will be indexed.
As far the Moz reports these are not updated minute by minute, to see if the canonical tag has fixed the problem in Moz's reports you'll have to wait till they do their next crawl (once a week). You may also use Google's Webmaster and ask for a re-crawl after you made changes.
Hope that helps,
Don
-
Thanks a lot ^_^ , But i need some help to apply this since i'm not developer
I already have canonical tag made by our developers but i don't know if it work properly , How could i know ?
I'm still getting duplicate content reports
I'll state the situation for you
www.example.com/somepage.html (site main format)
rel="canonical" for this page is = http://www.example.com/somepage.html
www.example.com/somepage (duplicate)
rel="canonical" for this page is = http://www.example.com/somepage
www.example.com/somepage/ (another duplicate)
rel="canonical" for this page is = http://www.example.com/somepage/
Is that right or not ?
and how can i measure if google see that as duplicate or not ?
Thanks
-
Hi Mohamed,
This is an important issue. By leaving both versions of the pages up, you run the risk of having it indexed twice and possibly suffer from duplicate content penalties.
There are a couple ways to fix it, but the easiest would be add a canonical meta tag to the page that points to the version your site should be using
**for no extension**
or
**with the extension**
The other way would be to modify your .htaccess file in your root directory to forward all traffic to whichever version you are using.
To force removal of the extension you could do this
RewriteEngine On
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f
RewriteRule ^([^.]+)$ $1.html [L,NC,R=301]To force extension you could do this
RewriteEngine On
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !^..html$
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d
RewriteRule ^(.)$ $1.html [L,R=301]The htaccess should work on most host but if I remember correctly GoDaddy has some special requirements. Check with them if you are using them as a host.
Hope this helps,
Don
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
-
My sites "pages indexed by Google" have gone up more than qten-fold.
Prior to doing a little work cleaning up broken links and keyword stuffing Google only indexed 23/333 pages. I realize it may not be because of the work but now we have around 300/333. My question is is this a big deal? cheers,
Technical SEO | | Billboard20120 -
Leveraging "Powered by" and link spam
Hi all, For reference: The SaaS guide to leveraging the "Powered By" tactic. My product is an embeddable widget that customers place on their websites (see example referenced in link above). A lot of my customers have great domain authority (big brands, .gov's etc). I would like to use a "Powered By" link on my widgets to create high quality backlinks. My question is: if I have identical link text (on potentially hundreds) of widgets, will this look like link spam to Google? If so, would setting the link text randomly on each widget to one of a few different phrases (to create some variation) avoid this? Hope this makes sense, thanks in advance.
Technical SEO | | NoorHammad0 -
Rel="canonical" in hyperlink
Inside my website, I use the rel = "canonical" but I do not use it in the but in a hyperlink. Now it is not clear to me if that goes well. See namely different stories about the Internet. My example below link: Bruiloft
Technical SEO | | NECAnGeL0 -
"Not Selected" in index status rising continously
Hello, After the penguin update my site slowly suffered loss in traffic. and now from daily 15K-18K its droped to 8K. (6K in weekends) I have been trying to find out what the reasons are but i havent got any good luck yet been few months now. I noticed this change in the GWT tho : Not selected in index status significantly risen up. please see attached image. My site is Designzzz i am continously fixing errors and problems shown in the seomoz pro tools. If you guys can take few mins to evaluate what could be the reason for such drop i will be thankful :} cheers 6Xtkp.jpg
Technical SEO | | wickedsunny10 -
My seo company has a footer link that links to my site by keyword will this effect my rankings
My old SEo company has a footer link by keyword to my site so it acts like a site wide link will this effect my rankings. My site was in the top 5 for many keywords now page 2 and 3 so I am trying to see what has effected it as we havent changed what we do
Technical SEO | | Casefun0 -
Would this be considered "thin content?"
I share a lot of images via twitter and over the last year I've used several different tools to do this; mainly twitpic, and now instagram. Last year I wanted to try to find a way to host those images on my site so I could get the viewers of the picture back to my site instead a 3rd party (twitpic, etc.) I found a few plugins that worked "sort of" well, and so I used that for a while. (I have since stopped doing that in favor of using instagram.) But my question is do all of these image posts hurt my site you think? I had all of these images under a category called "twitter" but have since moved them to an uncategorized category until I figure out what I want to do with them. I wanted to see if anyone could chime in and give me some advice. Since the posts are just images with no content (other than the image) and the title isn't really "optimized" for anything do these posts do me more harm than good. Do I delete them all? Leave them as is? Or do something else? Also in hindsight I'm assuming this was a bad idea since the bounce rate for people clicking on a link just to see an image was probably very high, and may have caused the opposite result of what I was looking for. If I knew than what I know now I would have tracked the bounce rate of those links, how many people who viewed one of those images actually went to another page on the site, etc. But hindsight's 20/20. 🙂
Technical SEO | | NoahsDad0 -
If you only want your home page to rank, can you use rel="canonical" on all your other pages?
If you have a lot of pages with 1 or 2 inbound links, what would be the effect of using rel="canonical" to point all those pages to the home page? Would it boost the rankings of the home page? As I understand it, your long-tail keyword traffic would start landing on the home page instead of finding what they were looking for. That would be bad, but might be worth it.
Technical SEO | | watchcases0 -
What is link juice - and how do I utilise it?
Apologies for the very basic question - I am trying to determine exactly what link juice is. Every article I seem to find assumes that you already know what link juice is. From what I can tell it is how your internal links push around from your homepage and how they flow through your site. I don't understand how to optimize this and how to improve it throughout my site - or what the opportunities are. I'll attach an image of my site link numbers compared to a few rivals (names removed) to illustrate the difference - not vs the first column but certainly the other two. Can someone shed some light on Link Juice for me and point me in the right direction? Thanks. Oy2c5.png
Technical SEO | | Benj250