Canonical tag help
-
Hi,
We have a product which is marketed by affiliates . Affiliates send referrals to our sale page by adding their affiliate IDs to our product page like http://www.mysite.com/products.php?ref= 12345.
We want to avoid the content duplication impression to Google by using canonical tags but we are not clear about its use.
Should we use it on http://www.mysite.com/products.php ( actual page) or we should create temporary pages for each referral id i.e http://www.mysite.com/products.php?ref= 12345 and then add canonical tags to all those pages linking to proper page i.e http://www.mysite.com/products.php ?
Thanks,
shaz
-
Thanks Peter, I've added those urls to canonical tags which are actually being viewed by users i.e simple-url from above mentioned rewrite rule . So now same url is being used both for user and search engine bots
-
Be careful changing your sitewide URL structure, but if you're going to show users the "url-with-extension" version, make that canonical. It's dangerous to use one version for users and another for search, and people will start linking to the one they see.
I'd also 301-redirect the rewrite (add "[R=301]" to the end of the rewrite rule) and link to it internally. If you have one "canonical" version for bots and another for visitors, you'll end up with a mess.
-
Hi,
I've written some rewrite rules in htaccess file to make url names more readable like
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} (.)(simple-url)$
RewriteRule (.)$ url-with-extension.phpShould i specify the "simple-url" or "url-with-extension.php" (urls from above example) in canonical tag as proper url ?
Thanks,
shaz
-
Thanks Peter for the explanation. We only have ref ID so we should be fine by adding canonical tag to only products.php.
All of you have been really helpful.
Regards,
shahzad
-
Thank you Dr. Pete
-
I want to expand on what I think Istvan was trying to say. First, the canonical on "products.php" will consolidate all of the affiliate IDs. That should be a perfectly valid solution here.
The only warning is whether you have other IDs on that page that drive different product views. If it's just one single product page, then the canonical is great here. If, however, you have something like:
http://www.mysite.com/products.php?prod=1&ref=12345
http://www.mysite.com/products.php?prod=2&ref=12345
...where "prod=" (or something like it) represents separate products, then a canonical tag to "/products.php" would collapse ALL of your product pages into one. That's certainly not what you want. So, it does depend a lot on the details. In that case, the "?prod=1", etc. version would actually be the canonical version (you'd have to set the tag dynamically).
-
Yes, the parameter is there only to track the affiliate
Thanks,
shaz
-
But you'd still want to add a rel=canonical on the products.php page so that all "versions" that get indexed with a referrer parameter are pointing to the vanilla products.php as the canonical version?
-
Hi,
I'm afraid your answer is not entirely correct.
Let me quote directly from the source:
"If Google knows that these pages have the same content, we may index only one version for our search results. Our algorithms select the page we think best answers the user's query. Now, however, users can specify a canonical page to search engines by adding a **** element with the attribute
rel="canonical"
to the **** section of the non-canonical version of the page. Adding this link and attribute lets site owners identify sets of identical content and suggest to Google: "Of all these pages with identical content, this page is the most useful. Please prioritize it in search results." -
Hi Shaz,
When you are loading http://www.mysite.com/products.php?ref=12345, you are basically loading http://www.mysite.com/products.php.
In order to resolve the duplicate content issue for each product page you could insert a canonical pointing to itself OR you could eliminate the duplicates by adding the affiliate parameters into Google Webmaster Tools -> Site Configuration -> URL parameters. This way you will tell Google what that specific parameter is.
Or you could use both (if it is a large website, it is advised to do so).
I hope that helped,
Istvan
-
Hi Shaz,
I'm guessing the parameter displays no alternative content, it's simply there for tracking, right?
If so, the canonical tag should simply be added to http://www.mysite.com/products.php
You can also set how you want Google to interact with parameters via Google Webmaster Tools.
Good luck!
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
-
What is the best tag to use for your Logo ?
Hi, I'm wondering what is the best tag to use on your logo. We're currently using h1 and i want to scrap that ASAP.
On-Page Optimization | | Alex.harvey.Cortex0 -
Multiple H1 tags on Squarespace blog page?
Hi All, I use Squarespace and while running my site (https://www.growmassagebusiness.com) through programs am seeing that my blog posts are being seen as one page with multiple H1 tags. I read through the SS help desk and found back in 2015 someone wrote that it's not a bit deal b/c of HTML5 and that the search engines will read each blog post as a sub-page. I'm not so sure about that and wondering what the experts think? If that is screwy then I'm considering possibly making each blog post it's own page rather than using their blog posting format.
On-Page Optimization | | rajam0 -
Stong Tags still useful in 2016
Hello, Are strong tags still beneficial in 2016? A few co-workers feel they look spammy on our site and that they are no longer really used by the search engines. However, we can't find any real significant info for no longer implementing them or saying they're outdated. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | STP_SEO0 -
Difference in using dividers in TITLE TAG
Hi everyone, i know that dividers in title or even title tag doesnt have much of an impact on better rankings. I had great rankings for many keywords, not using dividers or using only one divider. However for better reading comprehension and usability, and also aesthetics i started to use the pipe as my main divider and other secondary dividers. I saw many pages drop in rankings vs other less competent and with less content pages. My format was as follows: Product Brand | Product description - Additional info or local info ie. Fiber Glass MBI | Insulation Batts for Home and Commercial use - Acoustic and Thermal Insulation I changed the format for a handful of pages, and saw immediate results on rankings and traffic on those pages. Product Brand with Product Description - Additional Info ie. Fiber Glass MBI Insulation Batts for Commercial use - Acoustic and Thermal Insulation. Does it sound like something i should implement page wide. I personally like the aesthetics of the pipe as it gives a cleaner look, but the better rankings on the changed pages with using only one divider makes me think. Does it sound familiar, or its just a coincidence, Regards,
On-Page Optimization | | JesusD0 -
H1 Tags on Volusion Product Pages
So I'm working with a client who has no heading tags on his site and I'm wondering if there is an ideal method to implementing these on the product pages specifically, as the wording I ideally want to specify is is the product title, which i can't really code with an H1. Has anyone run into this issue? If so, what was your solution? Also, how vital are these heading tags on the product pages, anyways? If the Volusion SEO expert could chime in, that would be much appreciated. Thanks everyone!
On-Page Optimization | | BrandLabs0 -
tagged as duplicate content?
Hello folks, I'm new to SEOmoz . I was looking at our Crawl Diagnostics and found that some of our blog posts that have been commented on were tagged as duplicate content. For example: http://thankyouregistry.com/blog/remarriages-and-gift-registries/ http://thankyouregistry.com/blog/remarriages-and-gift-registries/comment-page-1/ I'm unsure how to fix these, so any ideas would be appreciated. Thanks a lot!
On-Page Optimization | | GiftReg0 -
Tags on blog post
I have just ran a report on SEOMOZ and it's came back saying I have over 1000 pages on my website with duplicate content, I thought wow that's not good, however when I looked at the report it was counting duplicate content because I have used more than one tag on a blog post, for example the blog post: www.example.com/blog-post/ Has the tags example 1 example 2 example 3 Meaning I have these URLs www.example.com/blog/tag/example-1 www.example.com/blog/tag/example-2 www.example.com/blog/tag/example-3 All 3 URLs above have the same content as www.example.com/blog-post/ because of the tags, is this a problem? Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | Paul781 -
Canonical URL problem
On page analysis wanted me to add a canonical url tag. However I added then re ran the on page analysis and it came up with an error. What is the proper way to add a canonical url tag in the head of an index page? ie. add a canonical tag to www.hompeage.com/index.html would it be ? Or should I ignore this for a home page? Because I add it then run the analysis again and get this? Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical Moderate fix <dl> <dt>Canonical URL</dt> <dd>"http://www.ensoplastics.com/index.html"</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>If the canonical tag is pointing to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. Make sure you're targeting the right page (if this isn't it, you can reset the target above) and then change the canonical tag to reference that URL.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>We check to make sure that IF you use canonical URL tags, it points to the right page. If the canonical tag points to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. If you've not made this page the rel=canonical target, change the reference to this URL. NOTE: For pages not employing canonical URL tags, this factor does not apply.</dd> <dd>So do I add it or not? If I don't I get a lower page rating if I take it off I get a higher page rating with room for improvement. </dd> </dl>
On-Page Optimization | | ENSO0