How big of a problem is this? - link cannonicalization I think?
-
Hello! I'm new here. My moz Pro account is flagging my website for having 282 duplicate pages, which it is saying are critical issues. I looked at this and it seems like the problem is that many of my pages are being indexed like: www.joeborders.com and joeborders.com and oeborders.com/index. I think this is an issue with link cannonicalization...right? I contacted my website builder/host a while ago and they said they don't have a way to to link cannonicalization....is this a huge problem?...Is there some way to do it that I'm missing? Should i get a new website builder/host?
for reference, this is what my builder/host said when I asked them about it:
"Good question, at the moment we don't offer it, I will add it to our feature request list, as I think it would be a good idea. In a traditional hosting environment this would be using a htaccess file, since we are in ruby on rails environment we would need come up with a custom solution."
-
I'm using www.jigsy.com . It's pretty good, but there have been a few times when I've had to code my own html to get something to work
-
Lol. You're right. Sorry. I assumed you meant redirect through canonical links
-
Nice! This is exactly what the first part of my recommendation was.
-
Woot! I think I fixed this! Instead of using link cannonicalization I found out that I can to a site wide 301 redirect from the http:// version to the www. version. Does anybody think this is totally wrong? I researched in the Moz library for a while and I think this is an acceptable solution.
-
Thanks for the response Logan ^_^. I've read through the articles on Moz about how to use the cannonicalization tag, my problem is that I dont seem to have access to "joeborders.com" (without the www.) to be able to add the tag there. What do you think? ...as far as I know there is no way to do anything about this...unless I redirect the www. version to the other....but I think that would be detrimental to my google rankings.
-
Hi there,
There's two things that should be done to fix this:
The first is that www and non-www versions should not both be available, one version should redirect to the other version. It doesn't matter which you choose, but in your case, Google already has www indexed, so I'd go with that. This will take care of the first two examples of dupes (www.joeborders.com vs. joeborders.com).
The  second is the canonical tag, assuming you go with the www version of your domain, your canonical tag would look like this: . This would take care of the /index issue.
You said this site was built using Ruby of Rails, that seems like overkill for a basic content site (unless there's more to it that I'm missing). You're probably overpaying for a solution that far too robust for what you need, so yes, you might consider searching for a new developer and hosting solution.
-
....I feel like this might seem like a dumb question. I've read about link cannonicalization in the Moz articles, but I don't know how to do anything about site wide cannonicalization ie http://joeborders.com ---->www.joeborders.com when I don't have access to http://joeborders.com.
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
-
Regarding Internal Links
I analyse my Birthday Page "https://www.giftalove.com/birthday"with comapare link profiles and found that total Internal Link 47,234. How my internal link suddenly increse. Please provide my details about my internal links.
Technical SEO | | Packersmove0 -
Webmaster tools not showing links but Moz OSE is showing links. Why can't I see them in the Google Search Console
Hi, Please see attached photos. Â I have a website that shows external follow links when performing a search on open site explorer. Â However, they are not recognised or visible in search console. Â This is the case for both internal and external links. The internal links are 'no follow' which I am getting developer to rectify. Any ideas why I cant see the 'follow' external links? Thanks in advance to those who help me out. Jesse T7dkL5s T7dkL5s OkQmPL4 3qILHqS
Technical SEO | | jessew0 -
No follow links on a blog
Hi On our blog, we have a section called 'Tags'. I have just noticed that these links are all "no follow" links. The tags section does appear on every single page on the blog - is this recommend to have them as 'no follow' links or should I get our developer to change them. Thanks
Technical SEO | | Andy-Halliday0 -
Wordpress Hatom problem
Hi, in Webmaster Tools i receive the following warnings: hatom-feedhatom-entry:Warning:Â At least one field must be set for HatomEntry.Warning:Â Missing required field "entry-title".Warning:Â Missing required field "updated".Warning:Â Missing required hCard "author".I googled a few strategies how to solve this problem but is it for SEO purpose really necessary to edit Theme core code to satisfy google's warnings?
Technical SEO | | reisefm0 -
Quality links are beneficial, but are neutral links detrimental?
So obviously a link profile featuring quality / authoritative / relavant in-bound links is preferable, but here's my question: If I'm starting work on a brand new domain, should I build links that one would consider neutral (i.e. from a non-spammy, but unrelated site) or should I not bother and only focus on quality links? Thanks
Technical SEO | | underscorelive0 -
Canonical: Is this a problem?
Hi!!
Technical SEO | | petrospan
I am running a small wordpress website and i have a question because i am a litle confusic about Rel Canonical notices in the crawl diagnostics! I have the seo by yoast and i have fix all the canonical url for my page, but i take notices. I must worried about it or is something that inform me that everyting is ok? rel.jpg rel.jpg0 -
Too many links? Do links to named anchors count (ie page#nameanchor)?
Hi, I have an internal search results page that contains approx 200 links in total. This links to approx 50 pages. Each result listing contains a link to the page in the format /page.html and also has 3 more links (for each listing) to named anchors within the page. eg /page.html#section1, /page.html#section2, /page.html#section3 etc. Should i remove the named anchors to keep my links per page under the Seomoz suggested max of 100? Will it impact crawl-ability or link juice being passed? Thanks in advance for your response.
Technical SEO | | blackrails0 -
Metrics to determine the quality of a link?
I found this very useful post on SEOMoz http://www.seomoz.org/blog/525600-metrics-how-do-you-measure-measure-a-link, but its a bit dated. Also, it doesn't really help in terms of applying exact metrics to measure the quality of a link. Does anyone have any other suggestions to help automate / determine the quality of a link?
Technical SEO | | nicole.healthline0