Redirecting Canonical 301s and Magento Website
-
I have an issue with a client's website where it has 3700+ pages, but roughly half of them are duplicates. Thankfully, the only difference between the original and the duplictes is the "?print" at the end of each URL (I suppose this is Magento's way of making a printable page version of the same page. I don't know, I didn't build it.)
My questions is, how can I get all the pages like this
http://www.mycompany.com/blah.html?print
to redirect to pages like this...
http://www.mycompany.com/blah.html
Also, do they NEED to be Canonical, or will a 301 redirect be sufficient.
Also, after having done this, if anybody knows, is there a way I can turn that feature off in Magento, because we're expanding our product line, and I don't want to have to keep chasing after these "?print" pages after the fact.
-
Late to this game, but just in case you're still waiting on your dev...
Magento has an automated add-on system called Magento Connect, and you can access it from your admin (unless the original installer disabled it on your account). You can just use that to install Yoast's plugin. Check out http://www.magentocommerce.com/magento-connect/canonical-url-for-magento.html
Aside from that, if you are using something after 1.4, you should have canonical built into your store (it's in the config section).
If you're not using something after 1.4, consider upgrading. It's not painless, but anything prior to 1.4.1 is pretty rough to use. I'm not surprised you've got bugs and general sadness.
-
Hehe, hey now, not all us developers are lazy
You know your system better than any of us do. My 1. and 2. are just the best-case order in which to get things done. Do what works for you and your site.
-
like I said, I will email your solution concerning the plugin to my web admin guy, but the reason why I'm kind of reticent to do that is it's more a matter of bureacracy (to be sensitive to his time constraints) rather than technical or lack of know-how. I want to get it done right, but I also want to get it done in a timely manner. But I will forward this to him. Thanks you sir.
-
I don't understand why you don't just use the rel="canonical" plugin I mentioned above... ?
-
thank you sir....I'll try to avoid the htaccess route then.
-
Yeah I guess this is the only way to go. Now I just got to get the webmaster to get around to it. (sigh)...
-
Yes to your first questions. Here's the process for each (as I see it):
1. Fix/remove the ability for system to generate ?print URL's and implement canonical tags; open beer and wait 'til search engines sort things out. Nothing more you can do here.
2. No fix to system so we still have ?print URL's. In this case, setup the 301's in your .htaccess file; however, as long as the system is still generating these ?print URLs, you will have to keep the redirects in the .htaccess in tact, permanently.
Untested:
RewriteEngine On
RewriteBase /
RewriteRule ^([^/]*).html?print$ /$1.html [L,NC,R=301]
-
I guess my question now is, just doing the htaccess route is a bad idea? in both 301s AND canonicals or just 301s? I guess I'm not looking for easy, but economical. Thanks for your responses.
-
I agree with THB on this, use rel="canonical" you simply want to say to the search engines "Hey this is the preferred URL for my content".
301's are for saying "Hey this page has permanently moved to a new page/site"
I would use the rel="canonical" plugin I posted for you above, it will automatically add the canonical tag for you, job done.
-
Yeah, I know, right. The problem is, I found this out only AFTER I bought the PRO version and mapped out the entirety of the site. Some of those ?print URLs are now indexed in the SEs. So I agree with nipping this problem in the bud (or the root, whichever one prefers), but I still need to know how to do it via the htaccess. In other words, I have to go backwards and take care of the rankings, THEN figure out how to turn it off (and I can go to the Magento forums for that).
-
So, assuming this works, can I eventually remove the ".html?print" versions of the pages after the SEs have changed the URLs in their indices?
also, I'm not getting the impression it's going to save me time on specifying different pages (it may save time, I'm not sure), but in the chance it doesn't or the plugin fails to do as advertised, what is the htaccess option for this? Because at least, in this case, I can see the immediacy in it AND you can do canonical rewrites FROM the htaccess.
My situation is, I'm not THAT advanced in wildcards to make this happen (otherwise, I'd do it myself via just trial and error until it works) AND I myself don't have access to the site (the webmaster does, whose part time) and I have a choice between "Hey, here's several (or one line) of code to put into htaccess to resolve this problem" OR "can you go through and implement this plug to do the Canonical redirects on every page, oh and by the way, please back up first."
So it's not merely JUST a technical problem or a know-how problem, it's also a bureaucratic problem that can mean the difference between getting it done in a few minutes, and it could take two weeks to make happen depending on this person's perception.
-
Just to clarify. If there is in fact no difference between the pages (as you originally stated), then please just use the canonical tag. As much as you might want to setup 301 redirects, they would not be the way to go in this case. Trust me.
Otherwise, here is what I would do, honestly: find out why the ?print is causing information to be displayed improperly in some cases. If it's accessing the same db tables using the same queries, then that shouldn't be happening. I'd fix that, and implement the canonical tags, and wait it out. That would be the easiest approach and most beneficial with the least impact to your site and any rankings.
If this is something your not capable of fixing (not sure if you're proficient with coding, etc), then you can setup 301's as a 'hack', but they should not be left in permanently as the process in which I stated just above is the best way to resolve the issue.
In order to assist you with any .htaccess markup, you'll need to provide some examples of your URL's, and whether they have any common identifiers.
-
OK - I was basing my answers on what you said, "the only difference between the original and the duplictes is the "?print" at the end of each URL"
If there is in fact different content on each page, and the ?print page is the one with the errors, then you should remove the ability for ?print pages to even be generated in the first place instead of having them constantly redirecting user/bots. Forever 301 re-directions can hurt you down the road.
Once you've removed the ability for users/bots to find and access the ?print pages, then setup the 301's and insert the canonical tags.
-
It looks like this plugin will add the rel="canonical" tag for you automatically: http://yoast.com/tools/magento/canonical/
View the source code after you have installed it to confirm it's working as expected.
-
I was answering this Kjay's response while this one was coming down the pipeline. I get you on the fact if they were TRULY identical, but the reason I wanted to do the 301s is because more than likely, the Magento engine is faulty, and I've found situaitons where the prices are different between the two versions, or the images and text haven't been updated, etc. etc., hence, the need for a 301
-
I guess my question is, if I use JUST the canonical, then the SEs will get around to changing the address, but will still go to the "?print" pages until that time.
Also, the Magento help aide on that said I had to do it with EACH individual page. It's going to be especially time-consuming to have to go back out into the admin, go back into the admin, and check to see EVERY time the page that I'm canonizing is the right html version. I think this is where accessing the htaccess will save me a bunch of time (I still have to change the title tags on the remaining original 1500 pages, as well as find out from the Magento site, to access the H1 tags in the templates).
If I use the basic 301 redirect, I get the benefit of the immediate redirect, but I fail to see the downside of having to "endure" the 301 redirect other than additional rules for the browser to access the server. I eventually want to get RID of these "?print" pages because I'm getting the feeling that prices won't update as reliably on the ".html?print" version of the pages, update images (which we HAVE had trouble with in the past) etc. etc. And there's also the possibility that people may still access those ?print pages even if I did just do a canonical. It's just better to admin and SEO 1500+ pages as opposed to 1500+ pages and their duplicates.
I guess, what I'm looking for is, more than likely, the syntax command that's going to include a wildcard function to accomodate everything between "http://www.mycompany.com/" and ".html?print" or ".html". What would that look like?
-
Agreed
-
Ya, this is what I was talking about. Just a standard canonical html tag inserted into the framework.
That will clear everything up for you (might take a wee bit, but Google will recognize it right away).
No need for .htaccess whatsoever since the content is identical. If the content were different, ie. the ?print page showed a completely different style format, then sure, setup some 301's to get the user's to the right page. But not needed for your situation.
-
I would just add:
rel="canonical" href="http://www.mycompany.com/blah.html" />
No need to add 301's.
This might be useful it's Magento specific: http://www.magentocommerce.com/wiki/adding_canonical_url_to_cms_pages
-
Okay, so if I were in the htaccess file, what would it look like?
would it be a Query string rewrite?
RewriteEngine On
_ RewriteBase /_
RewriteCond %{QUERY_STRING} ^(*)$
RewriteRule ^()html?print$ http://www.mycompany.com/()html$ [R=301]
or just a straight one line redirect
Redirect 301 /()html?print http://www.mycompany.com/().html
-
Canonical will suffice as it is basically a 301 anyways. Cleaner too as there is no actual redirect for the user, or bot, to endure.
You can also set it up in Google Webmaster Tools under 'Site Configuration > URL Parameters' to ignore that parameter; however, using the canonical tag will more than suffice in this case.
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
-
Should I do a redirect
Hello, I am building a new website with a new web address for subpages. The domain name stays the same. I am wondering if I should do redirect to the few pages that have an outside link going to them. I noticed all my subpage that don't have any external link have an authority of 18. I only have 1 subpage that has 2 external links and 1 of them has a spam score of 32 and then other one of 1. My website is about a 100 pages. What should I do for my subpages redirect , not redirect, redirect only the ones that have external links ? Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
Duplicate Content Errors new website. How do you know which page to put the rel canonical tag on?
I am having problems with duplicate content. This is a new website and all the pages have the same page and domain rank, the following is an example of the homepage. How do you know which page to use the canonical tag on? http://medresourcesupply.com/index.php http://medresourcesupply.com/ Would this be the correct way to use this? Here is another example where Moz says these are duplicates. I can't figure out why because they have different url's and content. http://medresourcesupply.com/clutching_at_the_throat http://medresourcesupply.com/index.php?src=gendocs&ref=detailed_specfications &category=Main
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | artscube.biz0 -
Unnecessary 301s?
hi mozzers, I'm doing an audit on a website. I detected over 60 301s of this nature: www.example.com/help 301d to www.example.com/help/. I believe these are completely useless and increase page load time. Am I right? should i kill those 301s? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ideas-Money-Art0 -
Construction website
Hi, I have a construction website that is aimed at tradesmen. There are 2 goals of the site: 1. To allow potential customers to sign up for a trade account. 2. To allow existing customers to access to products and login to their account to make an order. The site is full of categories and products which should be indexed so we rank for these trade products. The homepage redesign is where i am having an issue: Currently the site is set up like a standard retail site but without prices, which are viewable only when logged in. The homepage is designed such that there is several call to actions about promotions, services and to apply for a trade account, that apply to both existing and potential customers. At the moment there is a poor conversion to get potential customers to apply for a trade account. This is because there is too much distraction away from this goal and they are allowed to engage other areas of the site freely. The main purpose of the homepage should be to encourage potential customers to sign up. The secondary purpose to for existing customers to access the accounts and products. I believe potential customers should not be exposed to the categories and products as it is a distraction from the primary goal. Potential customers, i.e. Tradesmen, would already have a certain understanding of the types of products we provide, so I don't feel it is necessary to allow them to crawl the rest of the site unless they have an account. What are your thoughts on that? Here is my lack of understanding: On the homepage, if I restrict access to categories and products to existing account holders only, where a login is required to proceed, would that mean Google cannot access these pages to index them? Or is this only controlled by NoFollows & Robots.txt? Obviously not indexing is undesirable. I do understand potential customers will need some information about our range of products but the idea is to coerce them to sign up for an account so they can see this information. The more information that is provided to a potential customer, the higher the probability a person can make a decision against applying for an account. Restricting access creates a motivator to reveal information and we capture their data to converse with them personally. This increases the probability of us being able to retain their interest by providing a customised service based on their needs. All of this I feel makes perfect sense to me, the only query/obstacle I have is the indexing of the site. If Google cannot index pages that are restricted by account access, then I would like suggestions to solve/compromise/optimise the above. Just to address the desired behaviour of index pages. If in search a our product page appears, the person clicking the link would either be redirected or exposed to a login or sign up screen to view. Thank you so much for your help. Antonio
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AVSFencingSupplies0 -
Redirect non www. domain to WWW. domain for established website?
Hey guys, The website in question has been online for more than 5 years but there are still 2 versions of the website. Both versions are indexed by Google and of course, this will result in duplicate content. Is it necessary to redirect the non-www domain to the www. domain. What are the cons and advantages? Will a lot of organic traffic be lost at first (if non-www are getting a good amount of traffic)? Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BruLee0 -
Websites with same content
Hi, Both my .co.uk and .ie websites have the exact same content which consists of hundreds of pages, is this going to cause an issue? I have a hreflang on both websites plus google webmaster tools is picking up that both websites are targeting different counties. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Paul780 -
How does a competing website with clearly black hat style SEO tactics, have a far higher domain authority than our website that only uses legitimate link building tactics?
Through SEO Moz link analysis tools, we looked at a competing websites external followed links and discovered a large number of links going to Blog pages with domain authorities in the 90's (their blog page authorities were between 40 and 60), however the single blog post written by this website was exactly the same in every instance and had been posted in August 2011. Some of these blog sites had 160 or so links linking back to this competing website whose domain authority is 49 while ours is 28, their Moz Trust is 5.43 while ours is 5.18. An example of some of the blogs that link to the competing website are: http://advocacy.mit.edu/coulter/blog/?p=13 http://pest-control-termite-inspection.posterous.com/\ However many of these links are "no follow" and yet still show up on Open Site Explorer as some of this competing websites top linking pages. Admittedly, they have 584 linking root domains while we have only 35, but if most of them are the kind of websites posted above, we don't understand how Google is rewarding them with a higher domain authority. Our website is www.anteater.com.au Are these tactics now the only way to get ahead?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Peter.Huxley590 -
Canonical URL Question
Hi Everyone I like to run this question by the community and get a second opinion on best practices for an issue that I ran into. I got two pages, Page A is the original page and Page B is the page with duplicate content. We already added** ="Page A**" />** to the duplicate content (Page B).** **Here is my question, since Page B is duplicate content and there is a link rel="canonical" added to it, would you put in the time to add meta tags and optimize the title of the page? Thanks in advance for all your help.**
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DRTBA0