Help with canonical tag
-
hello-
i got this recommendation
<dl>
<dt>Recommendation</dt>
<dd>Add a canonical URL tag referencing this URL to the header of the page</dd>
<dd>from my "report card" and i see also that i have a lot of issues with duplicate content but i really dont have any duplicate content on my site.</dd>
<dd>the crawl has apparently marked every post in my blog as duplicate page content.</dd>
<dd>and the "use canonical tag" suggestion keeps appearing as a fix to my problems.</dd>
<dd>could you please help me with ------How do i create a canonical tag?</dd>
<dd>is it just rel=canonical?</dd>
<dd>and where do i put it?</dd>
<dd>i should put it on every page right?</dd>
<dd>or with CSS my webmaster could probably do it very quickly right?</dd>
<dd>i get the basic concept behind rel=canonical but i cant say i fully understand it -</dd>
<dd>i need some help with regard to how and where this tag should be placed.</dd>
<dd>thanks,</dd>
<dd>erik
</dd><dd>.</dd>
</dl>
-
Yes as long as the "www" is included in the URL of the canonical tag.
-
i hadnt realized this question was answered - i actually forgot i ever asked it - but thank you for the reply - when i use rel=canonical am i telling the SE's that i prefer www. ?
if the answer is yes - then i am all set - and the confusion is over
-
Hey Erik,
This is probably due to URLs of the form http://domain.com not being 301ed to http://www.domain.com.
Depending on how your site was created (e.g. dynamic, static, CMS), it maye be easier to place 301 redirects in your configuration (Assuming you are using Apache, but should be possible in any Web Server). If that is not possible, and you are using a dynamic language for your site, like PHP, you can place 301 redirect code there. Short of these things, you can do as the tool suggested, and create Canonical tags.
-
Hi Erik.
For an example of the canonical tag, right click on this thread's page, choose View Page Source, and look at the top of the document. About the sixth line down you will see a line of code which reads as: . You will also notice the URL of this page matches exactly with that portion of the URL. The code which adds the http://www.seomoz.org prefix is located elsewhere in the code.
I would recommend every page of your site have a canonical tag added. It goes in between the tags of your page's HTML code.
The idea is that there are multiple ways to get to the same page. For example, you can reach this page by typing in "http://www.seomoz.org/q/help-with-canonical-tag" or "http://seomoz.org/q/help-with-canonical-tag" into your browser. Which page is the correct URL? The www version? or the version without the www?
By adding a canonical to your page, you are telling search engines which version you prefer for your site.
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 Issue On AMP
Hi everyone,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MuhammadQasimAttari
I have one issue about canonical. kindly guide me about it. I have a site example.com/abc and I convert it on an amp and know its URLs is example.com/abc=?amp. but the search console tells me to add the proper canonical URL but both pages are the same. kindly guide me about it. what will I do?0 -
Importance (or lack of) Meta keywords tags and Tags in Drupal
I'm wondering should I put any effort in making Meta Keywords tags for my pages or normal Tags (they're separate in Drupal), since apparently first are not considered by most of search engines, while not sure about normal tags. Obviously SERPS has to determine partial valu of the page by content, thus consider keywords / tags to some extend. What's your opinion on that. Thank you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Optimal_Strategies1 -
Canonical - unexpected page ranking
We are getting good ranking for an unexpected page, rathewr than the one we were trying to get ranking for. Should we put a canonical on the 'unexpected page' to the page we would like to receive the ranking for - or do we risk losing the ranking? Any suggestions welcomed. Ian
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Substance-create0 -
Pages canonicaled to another appearing before the canonical on google searches
Hello, When I do this google search, this page(amandine roses category) appears before the one it is canonical-ed to(this multi-product version of amandine roses). This happens often with this multi-product template, where they don't rank as well as their category version(that are canonical to the multi-product version). Can someone maybe point us in the right direction on what the issue may be? What can be improved?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | globalrose.com0 -
Scanning For Duplicate Canonical Tags
I'm looking for a solution for identifying pages on a site that have either empty/undefined canonical tags, or duplicate canonical tags (meaning the tag occurs twice within the same page). I've used Screaming Frog to view sitewide canonical values, but the tool cannot identify when pages use the tag twice, nor can it differentiate between pages that have an empty canonical tag and pages that have no canonical tag at all. Any help finding a tool of some sort that can assist me in doing this would be much appreciated, as I'm working with tens of thousands of pages and can't do this manually.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | edmundsseo0 -
Emergency Help...
Hello All, I'm trying to get a better handle on this, but any help would be hugely appreciated. Per my Pro account, i just found out that the keyword i was severely trying to rank for "Boston Wedding Phot*grapher" i just declined by over 40 positions. Just last week i was in the #3 position. Needless to say, this is extremely bad. I feel sick from it. This is my livelyhood. I recently hired a 'so-called' SEO expert to look at it, but i'm having my doubts. I'm using a php based site with a wordpress blog. He added a bunch of 301 redirects from pages that the crawler was complaining about to my .htaccess file. He also installed the following plugins: Link Juice Keeper NoFollow Free The SEO Rich Snippets Udinra All Image Sitemap WP Robots Txt WP-PageNavi Add Meta Tags These are essentially the only changes made. Does anyone see anything blaring and/or obvious? I could really really use some help. My blog link is : http://www.symbolphoto.com/blog/ I'm assuming it's the blog because that's where most of my site content is located. Any advice is hugely appreciated. TIA.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | symbolphoto0 -
Any penalty for having rel=canonical tags on every page?
For some reason every webpage of our website (www.nathosp.com) has a rel=canonical tag. I'm not sure why the previous SEO manager did this, but we don't have any duplicate content that would require a canonical tag. Should I remove these tags? And if so, what's the advantage - or disadvantage of leaving them in place? Thank you in advance for your help. -Josh Fulfer
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mhans1 -
301 Redirect or Canonical Tag or Leave Them Alone? Different Pages - Similar Content
We currently have 3 different versions of our State Business-for-Sale listings pages - the versions are: **Version 1 -- Preferred Version: ** http://www.businessbroker.net/State/California-Businesses_For_Sale.aspx Title = California Business for Sale Ads - California Businesses for Sale & Business Brokers - Sell a Business on Business Broker Version 2: http://www.businessbroker.net/Businesses_For_Sale-State-California.aspx Title = California Business for Sale | 3124 California Businesses for Sale | BusinessBroker.net Version 3: http://www.businessbroker.net/listings/business_for_sale_california.ihtml Title = California Businesses for Sale at BusinessBroker.net - California Business for Sale While the page titles and meta data are a bit different, the bulk of the page content (which is the listings rendered) are identical. We were wondering if it would make good sense to either (A) 301 redirect Versions 2 and 3 to the preferred Version 1 page or (B) put Canonical Tags on Versions 2 and 3 labeling Version 1 as the preferred version. We have this issue for all 50 U.S. States -- I've mentioned California here but the same applies for Alabama through Wyoming - same issue. Given that there are 3 different flavors and all are showing up in the Search Results -- some on the same 1st page of results -- which probably is a good thing for now -- should we do a 301 redirect or a Canonical Tag on Versions 2 and 3? Seems like with Google cracking down on duplicate content, it might be wise to be proactive. Any thoughts or suggestions would be greatly appreciated! Thanks. Matt M
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MWM37720