Duplicate content & canonicals
-
Hi,
Working on a website for a company that works in different european countries.
The setup is like this:
www.website.eu/nl
www.website.eu/be
www.website.eu/fr
...You see that every country has it's own subdir, but NL & BE share the same language, dutch...
The copywriter wrote some unique content for NL and for BE, but it isn't possible to write unique for every product detail page because it's pretty technical stuff that goes into those pages.
Now we want to add canonical tags to those identical product pages. Do we point the canonical on the /be products to /nl products or visa versa?
Other question regarding SEOmoz: If we add canonical tags to x-pages, do they still appear in the Crawl Errors "duplicate page content", or do we have to do our own math and just do "duplicate page content" minus "Rel canonical" ?
-
Hey Joris,
As of now it will most likely see it as duplicate content, because technically it still is duplicate content to a crawler bot, they won't know your intentions or target audience for each subfolder. The only way you could get around our crawler seeing it as duplicate is by blocking rogerbot with robots.txt or meta robots from that subfolder. Then there is putting up relconanoicals, which is the best way.
Hope this sheds some light on the duplicate content issues.
Best,
Nick
SEOmoz -
Thanks Robert!
-
Will do!
-
Now, that was a good question. Why not send a quick email to help@SEOmoz.org and just ask if there is a way to circumvent? LMK please.
-
Hi Robert,
Thx for your quick answer, I will make sure that in Google Webmaster Tools we say that the /be is for Belgium and the /nl for The Netherlands, but the duplicate content will still show up in our reports in SEOmoz, no?
-
First question is: Have you thought of using the .cc instead of the sub directory? Rand speaks to the .fr issue in his WBF mentioned by iBiz Leverage.
As to canonical to avoid duplicate content, you shouldn't have a duplicate content issue even with the two languages so long as you set your country target for each. But, read or watch the WBF by Rand as it is full of info on this subject and domain auth, etc.
-
I have same problem and found this URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ets7nHOV1Yo
Here is also another link from SEOmoz; i think this is most helpful: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/international-seo-where-to-host-and-how-to-target-whiteboard-friday
Hope this can help.
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
-
Are AMP pages affecting mobile search visibility?
Hello fellow Mozzers. I've recently seen a fairly hefty drop in search visibility on Google mobile, from 12.8% to 4.1%. Desktop visibility is unaffected. The same search visibility drop is echoed in SEMRush. However, Google Analytics shows that our site traffic from mobile hasn't changed. The only thing I can think of is that we recently launched AMP pages. I know Google sometimes caches AMPs so they’re served off google domains. Could that mean that the cached version of the page is ranking rather than our own? That would explain the drop in visibility but stable traffic I think?! What other explanation could it be? Many thanks in advance, Kit
Moz Pro | | KitSmith0 -
Duplicate Site Content found in Moz; Have a URL Parameter set in Google Webmaster Tools
Hey, So on our site we have a Buyer's Guide that we made. Essentially it is a pop-up with a series of questions that then recommends a product. The parameter ?openguide=true can be used on any url on our site to pull this buyer's guide up. Somehow the Moz Site Crawl reported each one of our pages as duplicate content as it added this string (?openguide=true) to each page. We already have a URL Parameter set in Google Webmaster Tools as openguide ; however, I am now worried that google might be seeing this duplicate content as well. I have checked all of the pages with duplicate title tags in the Webmaster Tools to see if that could give me an answer as to whether it is detecting duplicate content. I did not find any duplicate title tag pages that were because of the openguide parameter. I am just wondering if anyone knows:
Moz Pro | | MitchellChapman
1. a way to check if google is seeing it as duplicate content
2. make sure that the parameter is set correctly in webmaster tools
3. or a better way to prevent the crawler from thinking this is duplicate content Any help is appreciated! Thanks, Mitchell Chapman
www.kontrolfreek.com0 -
Can someone kindly explain what 'Crawl Issue Found: No rel="canonical" Tags' means? Is this a critical error and how can it be rectified?
Can someone kindly explain what 'Crawl Issue Found: No rel="canonical" Tags' means? Is this a critical error and how can it be rectified?
Moz Pro | | JoshMcLean0 -
Links & page authority crawl
I see the links and page authority have not been updated in over a month... does anyone know how often it gets updated?
Moz Pro | | nazmiyal0 -
Www, non www, 301 redirects, Google webmaster tools & SeomozPro
arg! Any help on this topic would be greatly appreciated! This is in regards to sheffieldfurniture .com In October of 2011 I had our host set up a redirect for our site so all non www requests would be redirected to the www version and it works great (so it seems at least) Recently I signed up for SEOMOZPRO and when I started trying to track my organic results for various keywords I realized that Google has my site indexed in the non www format. Is this a problem? I’ve read you can tell google what your preferred domain is in Google Webmaster Tools, is that what I should be doing? Are there any negatives to doing that? I’m just confused as to why Google hasn’t noticed or acknowledged the redirect in 4 months. It makes me wonder if something isn’t working properly? I have since added a second SEOMOZPRO campaign with the non www version but I’m worried about having historical tracking issues if I then tell google to use the www version…
Moz Pro | | SheffieldMarketing0 -
Have I got Rel Canonical or not?
I have 180 warnings of rel=canonical. The exact wording says this: Using rel=canonical suggests to search engines which URL should be seen as canonical. First - I don't know what that means - is that a good thing of bad thing? Second - Because of the above question, Im not sure if I have it or should have or it do have it but shouldn't. Which should I have? What should it look like? How do I fix it? Also, I have notices that say 'issue: 301 redirect' and a line about what a 301 redirect is. Again, do I have it, or not have it, should I have it? Do I have it but shouldn't?
Moz Pro | | borderbound0 -
We were unable to grade that page. We received a response code of 301\. URL content not parseable
I am using seomoz webapp tool for my SEO on my site. I have run into this issue. Please see the attached file as it has the screen scrape of the error. I am running an on page scan from seomoz for the following url: http://www.racquetsource.com/squash-racquets-s/95.htm When I run the scan I receive the following error: We were unable to grade that page. We received a response code of 301. URL content not parseable. This page had worked previously. I have tried to verify my 301 redirects and am unable to resolve this error. I can perform other on page scans and they work fine. Is this a known problem with this tool? I have verified ensuring I don't have it defined. Any help would be appreciated.
Moz Pro | | GeoffBatterham0
