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
-
Do Blog Tags affect SEO at all anymore?
We're trying to standardize the use of tags on our site amongst writers/editors, and I'm trying to come up a list of tags they can choose from to tag posts with - and telling them to use no more than 10 (absolute maximum) per post. We are also in the process of migrating to a new CMS, and have 8 defined categories that will all have their own landing page within our "News" section. TLDR: Do blog tags have any impact on SEO anymore? Are they solely meant to help users find articles related on popular topics, or does creating a tag for a popular topic help to improve organic visibility? Full Question: With the tag standardization, I want to make sure we're creating the most useful and effective tags; and the UX/SEO sides of my brain are conflicted. To my understanding, creating a tag about a high volume topic in an industry helps establish the website's relevance to Google/other search engines about that topic and improves overall relevance; but the tag feed page (ex: http://freshome.com/tag/home-protection/) isn't really meant for organic search visibility. So my other question is, is it worth it to noindex the tag pages in the robots.txt? Will that affect any benefit to increased relevance for Google (if there is any)? I'm interested to hear others' thoughts and suggestions. Thanks in advance!
On-Page Optimization | | davidkaralisjr0 -
Rel Canonical help
Is it possible to confirm this to me please? My understanding of the rel canonical tag was to tell google of duplicate content? so for instance product 1
On-Page Optimization | | TeamacPaints
www.ourdomain.co.uk/products/category/subcategory/theproduct1 Product 1a
www.ourdomain.co.uk/products/category/subcategory/theproduct1a same content just a different colour would be rel canonical'd to Product 1 as thats the main product, is my understanding correct? Now here is what I have discovered. www.ourdomain.co.uk/products/category/subcategory/theproduct1 has a rel canonical tag that reverts back to www.ourdomain.co.uk/products/ which isn't optimized as such its just a generic catalog page. This is inccorect and google will dismiss the actial product and revert to the generic catalog page? any help would be great.0 -
What does Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical mean?
I'm a newb and see this on my report and I don't understand what it means. Any help?
On-Page Optimization | | smartapps0 -
Can a page lose ranking because it has too many bold tags?
I run a product search website for the Engineering Sector. Each of the companies listed on the website has a profile page. This page used to rank very well in google. Over the last couple of weeks these pages disappeared for google i.e they fell about 20 to 30 spots in the search results for relevant keywords like the Manufacturer Name. I was trying to analyze the page and found that Each of the Categories that the manufacturer supports was listed in "bold" and linked to the page for that category. A manufacturer can support up to 20 or 30 categories so this results in about 20 or 30 Bold keywords. Is this a bad practice? Could this be a reason for a drop in ranking or do bold keywords on a page not matter? What are your views?
On-Page Optimization | | raghavkapur0 -
Canonical Tag for Ecommerce Site
I implemented a canonical tag on each product page for my clients ecommerce site and my rankings tanked. Has this happened to anyone else? If so, when can I expect rank to return?
On-Page Optimization | | DynoSaur0 -
Is it ok to use the H1 tag for bullet points?
Our search results page doesn't have a typical H1 tag because adding a true header would take up space unnecessarily. Therefore, we've assigned the h1 tag to be the breadcrumb. As filters are applied, the breadcrumb grows to include these filters. This breadcrumb is coded as bullet points, even though they're not the typical style of bullet points. Here's a screenshot: http://screencast.com/t/AjGC9iAYR3 For example, the breadcrumb: Home >> NYC Social Media Classes >> Adult >> Manhattan is currently coded as: | |
On-Page Optimization | | mevseo
| | * class="first"><a <span="">href</a><a <span="">="</a>/">Home |
| | * <a <span="">href</a><a <span="">="</a>/nyc/classes/social-media/age-adults/neighborhood-manhattan" class="Selected">Search results |
| | |
| | |
| | id="cat_social-media" type="checkbox" checked onclick="setCategory('social-media')" /> |
| | # style="font-size: 12px; display: inline;">NYC Social Media Classes |
| | <label <span="">for</label>="cat_social-media"> |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | <nobr>id="age_adults" type="checkbox" checked onclick="setAge('adults')" /><label <span="">for</label>="age_adults">Adults</nobr> |
| | |
| | |
| | <nobr>id="nbhd_manhattan" type="checkbox" checked onclick="setNeighborhood('manhattan')" /><label <span="">for</label>="nbhd_manhattan">Manhattan</nobr> |
| | |
| | | Right now that H1 tag just relates to 'NYC Social media classes', but we'd like to expand it to include both 'Manhattan' & 'Adults' - would that be ok? And if so, would it be better to put the tag before and after the tag?0 -
Cross-domain canonical
HI, We've got a German e-commerce site on an .at domain and would like to have a copy on a .de domain as we expect higher conversions for German users there. The idea now would be to make use of the cross-domain canonical tag, create a "duplicate" on the .de domain and add a canonical tag on all sites and refer to the original content on the .at domain. That would mean the .de won't rank, but German users could see the .de domain, Austrian users the .at domain in the address bar and everybody could feel "at home" ... that's the theory. What do you guys think? Valid strategy?
On-Page Optimization | | gmellak0 -
Sitemap Help!
Hi Guys, Quick question regarding sitemaps. I am currently working on a huge site that has masses of pages. I am looking to create a site map. How would you guys do this? i have looked at some tools but it say it will only do up to 30,000 pages roughly. It is so large it would be impossible to do this myself....any suggestions? Also, how do i find out how many pages my site actually has indexed and not indexed?? Thank You all Wayne
On-Page Optimization | | wazza19850