Google Search Console and User-declared canonical is actually Hreflang tag
-
Hey,
We recently launched a US version of UK based ecommerce website on the us.example.com subdomain. Both websites are on Shopify so canonical tags are handled automatically and we have implemented Hreflang tags across both websites.
Suddenly our rankings in the UK have dropped and after looking in search console for the UK site ive found that a lot of pages are now no longer indexed in Google because the User-declared canonical is the Hreflang tag for the US URL.
Below is an example
https://www.example.com/products/pac-man-arcade-cabinet - is the product page
- is the canonical tag
rel="alternate" href="https://www.example.com/products/pac-man-arcade-cabinet" hreflang="en-gb" /> - UK hreflang tag
rel="alternate" href="https://us.example.com/products/pac-man-arcade-cabinet" hreflang="en-us" /> - US Hreflang tag
then in Google search console the user-defined canonical is https://us.example.com/products/pac-man-arcade-cabinet but it should be https://www.example.com/products/pac-man-arcade-cabinet
The UK website has been assigned to target the United Kingdom in Search Console and the US website has been assigned to target the United States. We also do not have access to robots.txt file unfortunately.
Any help or insight would be greatly appreciated.
-
The UK website has been assigned to target the United Kingdom in Search Console and the US website has been assigned to target the United States. We also do not have access to robots.txt file, unfortunately.
So you have claimed www.domain.com and targeted it to the UK. And you have claimed us.domain.com and targeted it to the US in Search Console?
And for the two URLs below are these tags all on each page exactly as I have them below?
https://www.example.com/products/pac-man-arcade-cabinet
-
- is the canonical tag
- <link rel="alternate" href="https: www.example.com="" products="" pac-man-arcade-cabinet" hreflang="en-gb">- UK hreflang tag</link rel="alternate" href="https:>
- <link rel="alternate" href="https: us.example.com="" products="" pac-man-arcade-cabinet" hreflang="en-us">- US Hreflang tag</link rel="alternate" href="https:>
https://us.example.com/products/pac-man-arcade-cabinet
-
- is the canonical tag
- <link rel="alternate" href="https: www.example.com="" products="" pac-man-arcade-cabinet" hreflang="en-gb">- UK hreflang tag</link rel="alternate" href="https:>
- <link rel="alternate" href="https: us.example.com="" products="" pac-man-arcade-cabinet" hreflang="en-us">- US Hreflang tag</link rel="alternate" href="https:>
Where are you searching from? What are you searching? And is there anything different between those two pages other than targeting? Do you redirect users based on IP?
-
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
-
Canonical Tags Before HTTPS MIgration
Hi Guys I previously asked a question that was helpfully answered on this forum, but I have just one last question to ask. I'm migrating a site tomorrow from http to https. My one question is that it was mentioned that I may need to "add canonical tags to the http pages, pointing to their https equivalent prior to putting the server level redirect in place. This is to ensure that you won't be causing yourself issues if the redirect fails for any reason." This is an e-commerce site with a number of links, is there a quick way of doing this? Many Thanks
Technical SEO | | ruislip180 -
Adding /es version to google search console
I have a Wordpress site and we are using WPML for making it bilingual. The domain is: https://www.designerfreelance.net and for Spanish https://www.designerfreelance.net/es Do I have to add to Google search console the /es version? And the no www: https://www.designerfreelance.net https://www.designerfreelance.net/es https://designerfreelance.net https://designerfreelance.net/es and do I have to add the non ssl version? http://www.designerfreelance.net http://www.designerfreelance.net/es http://designerfreelance.net http://designerfreelance.net/es Thanks
Technical SEO | | Trazo0 -
Questions about canonicals
Howdy Moz community, I had a question regarding canonicals. I help a business with their SEO, and they are a service company. They have one physical location, but they serve multiple cities in the state. My question is in regards to canonicals and unique content. I hear that a page with slightly differing content for each page won't matter as much, if most of the content is relevantly the same. This business wants to create service pages for at least 10 other cities they service. The site currently only have pages that are targeting one city location. I was wondering if it was beneficial to use a template to service each city and then put a canonical there to say that it is an identical page to the main city page? Example: our first city was san francisco, we want to create city pages for santa rosa, novato, san jose and etc. If the content for the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, city were the same content as the 1st city, but just had the slight change with the city name would that hurt? Would putting a canonical help this issue, if i alert that it is the same as the 1st page? The reason I want to do this, is because I have been getting concerns from my copywriter that after the 5th city, they can't seem to make the services pages that much different from the first 4 cities, in terms of wording of the content and its structure. I want to know is there a simpler way to target multiple cities for local SEO reasons like geo targeted terms without having to think of a completely new way to write out the same thing for each city service page, as this is very time consuming on my end. Main questions? Will making template service pages, changing the city name to target different geographic locations and putting a canonical tag for the new pages created, and referring back to the main city page going to be effective in terms of me wanting to rank for multiple cities. Will doing this tell google my content is thin or be considered a duplicate? Will this hurt my rankings? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Ideas-Money-Art0 -
Google Indexing
Hi Everybody, I am having kind of an issue when it comes to the results Google is showing on my site. I have a multilingual site, which is main language is Catalan. But of course if I am looking results in Spanish (google.es) or in English (google.com) I want Google to show the results with the proper URL, title and descriptions. My brand is "Vallnord" so if you type this in Google you will be displayed the result in Catalan (Which is not optimized at all yet) but if you search "vallnord.com/es" only then you will be displayed the result in Spanish What do I have to do in order for Google to read this the way I want? Regards, Guido.
Technical SEO | | SilbertAd0 -
Robots.txt and canonical tag
In the SEOmoz post - http://www.seomoz.org/blog/robot-access-indexation-restriction-techniques-avoiding-conflicts, it's being said - If you have a robots.txt disallow in place for a page, the canonical tag will never be seen. Does it so happen that if a page is disallowed by robots.txt, spiders DO NOT read the html code ?
Technical SEO | | seoug_20050 -
How similar do pages need to be in order to utilize the canonical tag
Here is my specific situation. My company released new versions of a few documents in the fall. I was hoping that over time the old version would decline and the new version would rise but after 6 months the old version continues to rank #1 and the new version #3. The old version needs to stay on our site but users should really be getting to the most recent version. I think utilizing the canonical tag would solve the issue but i am concerned because the content on the actual pages is not duplicate but it is updated. Below are the two URLs to see the differences in the content. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/reports/06tr008.cfm http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/reports/10tr033.cfm Is this an appropriate situation to use the canonical tag? If not, is there a better solution.
Technical SEO | | SEI0 -
Search Engine Blocked by Robot Txt warnings for Filter Search result pages--Why?
Hi, We're getting 'Yellow' Search Engine Blocked by Robot Txt warnings for URLS that are in effect product search filter result pages (see link below) on our Magento ecommerce shop. Our Robot txt file to my mind is correctly set up i.e. we would not want Google to index these pages. So why does SeoMoz flag this type of page as a warning? Is there any implication for our ranking? Is there anything we need to do about this? Thanks. Here is an example url that SEOMOZ thinks that the search engines can't see. http://www.site.com/audio-books/audio-books-in-english?audiobook_genre=132 Below are the current entries for the robot.txt file. User-agent: Googlebot
Technical SEO | | languedoc
Disallow: /index.php/
Disallow: /?
Disallow: /.js$
Disallow: /.css$
Disallow: /checkout/
Disallow: /tag/
Disallow: /catalogsearch/
Disallow: /review/
Disallow: /app/
Disallow: /downloader/
Disallow: /js/
Disallow: /lib/
Disallow: /media/
Disallow: /.php$
Disallow: /pkginfo/
Disallow: /report/
Disallow: /skin/
Disallow: /utm
Disallow: /var/
Disallow: /catalog/
Disallow: /customer/
Sitemap:0 -
Post for last three years not visible in google search
Hi, just posted this on google webmaster, and thought I'd post it here for ideas as well: When using the search term site:www.thebudgetfashionista.com with the exception of the homepage the only results that come up are from three years ago. We are not sure whats going on, but other symptoms include:
Technical SEO | | simplygoodmedia
A drastic reduction of our crawl rate (via google webmaster)
A reduction in traffic from google searches (via analytics)
We first noticed it after a pronouced downward trend after the most recent agolrithm was released Recent activities include:
Fixing crawl errors in GW with 301 redirects
Optimizing older URLs and creating redirects for those. Any hints of suggestion of what might be the problem what greatly be appreciated0