Should I be using rel canonical here?
-
I am reorganizing the data on my informational site in a drilldown menu.
So, here's an example. One the home page are several different items. Let's say you clicked on "Back Problems". Then, you would get a menu that says: Disc problems, Pain relief, paralysis issues, see all back articles.
Each of those pages will have a list of articles that suit. Some articles will appear on more than one page.
Should I be worried about these pages being partially duplicates of each other? Should I use rel-canonical to make the root page for each section the one that is indexed. I'm thinking no, because I think it would be good to have all of these pages indexed. But then, that's why I'm asking!
-
I've begun using this tool to compare pages for duplication. On the page they say 80%+ is duplicate, but I would be far more conservative.
http://www.wordsfinder.com/tool_duplicate_content_checker.php
-
I would not worry about this if the level of duplication is a small percentage.
However, if you have pages that will share a large percentage of the same items then it could be a problem.
The question is: How much is a "small percentage" and how much is a "large percentage". Duh?
I know of two blogs that have every post going into between two and six categories. This produces category pages where every post appears somewhere else on the blog in multiple locations. However, the lists on these pages are diverse. None of the categories are mirror images of one another or even share 25% of the same posts. These blogs have not experienced any problems.
If you think that you have too much duplication then you probably have too many categories. Or, you are too liberal in assigning items to multiple categories.
-
I would try to add some unique content to each page. So, if you have a page about Pain Relef, try adding a paragraph on top about it. I wouldn't worry about duplicate links unless the whole page have exact duplicates.
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
-
Index, follow on a paginated page with a different rel=canonical URL
Hello, I have a question about meta robots ="index, follow" and rel=canonical on category page pagination. Should the sorted page be <meta name="robots" content="index,follow"></meta name="robots" content="index,follow"> since the rel="canonical" is pointing to a separate page that is different from the URL? Any thoughts on this topic would be awesome. Thanks. Main Category Page
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Choice
https://www.site.com/category/
<meta name="robots" content="index,follow"><link rel="canonical" href="https: www.site.com="" category="" "=""></link rel="canonical" href="https:></meta name="robots" content="index,follow"> Sorted Page
https://www.site.com/category/?p=2&dir=asc&order=name
<meta name="robots" content="index, follow"=""><link rel="canonical" href="https: www.site.com="" category="" ?p="2""></link rel="canonical" href="https:></meta name="robots" content="index,> As you can see, the meta robots is telling Google to index https://www.site.com/category/?p=2&dir=asc&order=name , yet saying the canonical page is https://www.site.com/category/?p=2 .0 -
Link rel=next and prev validator?
Can I validate link next and prev markup for paginated content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Evan340 -
Syntax: 'canonical' vs "canonical" (Apostrophes or Quotes) does it matter?
I have been working on a site and through all the tools (Screaming Frog & Moz Bar) I've used it recognizes the canonical, but does Google? This is the only site I've worked on that has apostrophes. rel='canonical' href='https://www.example.com'/> It's apostrophes vs quotes. Could this error in syntax be causing the canonical not to be recognized? rel="canonical"href="https://www.example.com"/>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ccox10 -
Rel Canonical Link on the Canonical Page
Is there a problem with placing a rel=canonical link on the canonical page - in addition to the duplicate pages? For example, would that create create an endless loop where the canonical page keeps referring to itself? Two examples that are troubling me are: My home site is www.1099pro.com which is exactly the same as www.1099pro.com/index.asp (all updates to the home page are made by updating the index.asp page). I want www.1099pro.com/index.asp to have the rel=canonical link to point to my standard homepage www.1099pro.com but any update that I make on the index page is automatically incorporated into www.1099pro.com as well. I don't have access to my hosting web server and any updates I make have to be done to the specific landing pages/templates. I am also creating a new website that could possible have pages with duplicate content in the future. I would like to already include the rel=canonical link on the standard canonical page even though there is not duplicate content yet. Any help really would be appreciated. I've read a ton of articles on the subject but none really define whether or not it is ok to have the rel=canonical link on both the canonical page and the duplicate pages. The closest explanation was in a MOZ article that it was ok but the answer was fuzzy. -Mike
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Stew2220 -
Canonical Problem
Hello all. Could someone have a look at my page here www.ashley-wedding-cars.co.uk here and tell me why I have a canonical problem.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AshJez0 -
Should I use the canonical tag on all my mobile pages?
I've seen flavors of this question asked but did not see the exact response I was looking for. If I have a site at: www.site.com And I am creating a mobile version at: m.site.com (let's say a responsive design is not feasible at this time) And all the content on m.site.com is duplicative of the content on www.site.com What's the best way to handle that from an SEO perspective? Should I put a canonical tag on every mobile page pointing back to the www page? I assume that is better than a 'no index' tag on all pages of the mobile site?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | hbrown1080 -
New, Used, Refurbished Ecommerce Products
I'm in a situation where I am trying to improve an ecommerce site that sells about 10-15 products, and a few variations of each. My main headache is coming from the fact that we sell New, used, and refurbished products that are often overlapping. I'm not really sure if I am categorizing the products/structuring the site the best possible way. Here is an example that shows the current structure of the site: New Fruits
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | heroiceric
--> Bananas
----> Banana Model 1
----> Banana Model 2
--> Apples
----> Apple Model 1
----> Apple Model 2
--> Oranges
----> Orange Model 1
----> Orange Model 2 Refurbished Fruits --> Bananas
----> Refurbished Banana
--> Apples
----> Refurbished Apple
--> Oranges
----> Refurbished Orange The business, however, specializes in the refurbished models because they make significantly more money for each one that is sold. Because of this, it's way more important to get the refurbished models ranking up for the terms. I've been struggling to get good results from my SEO efforts and I think that this strange site structure could be holding me back. Would it make sense for me to use canonical on the "New Fruits" pages, pointing toward the "Refurbished Fruits" pages? Should I be trying to build links to the category pages or the actual product pages. IE: To "Refurbished Fruits --> Bananas" rather than "Refurbished Fruits --> Bananas --> Refurbished Banana?"0 -
Would the use of
Hi, I am wondering on you through relevant to SEO in the following situation. I have a "travel" website and obvisouls as part of that I have a whole list of desitinations. So I have a drop down in my page navigation, which lists all my desitinations. At the moment I see have 2 main options to display the lists as follows: 1/. Perfect Anchors, but not good for usability - IE repeating the word "holiday in a list of 100 destinations, looks spammy for one, and when the headline says "Holiday Destinations", then from a use perspective its pretty pointless and takes away from navigation rather than improves it".
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | James77
New York Holidays
Las Vegas Holidays 2/. Non Perfect Anchors - But better for usability
New York
Las Vegas So I am thinking - would the use of the title attribute provide a perfect solution?? Or am I wasting my time with this and it is just pointless considering it as an option. EG - what I had in mind was:
3/. Ideal Solution for both SEO and usability??
New York
Las Vegas Thanks for you help in advance.0