Duplicate content issue index.html vs non index.html
-
Hi
I have an issue. In my client's profile, I found that the "index.html" are mostly authoritative than non "index.html", and I found that www. version is more authoritative than non www. The problem is that I find the opposite situation where non "index.html" are more authoritative than "index.html" or non www more authoritative than www.
My logic would tell me to still redirect the non"index.html" to "index.html". Am I right?
and in the case I find the opposite happening, does it matter if I still redirect the non"index.html" to "index.html"?
The same question for www vs non www versions?
Thank you
-
Yes, I like using rewrites in an .htaccess file, which is covered in the links above.
-
I fix the 2 URLs.
In this case domain.com/index.html is the code for domain.com/.
Do you mean to use mode_rewrite and create a 301 redirect from domain.com/index.html to domain.com/ ?
Thank you for your time.
-
<colgroup><col span="30" width="64"></colgroup>
Hi Taysir, first of all ypou must take an overview with what is duplicate content? Solving the cannonical problems with www. Duplicate Content Issues in www & non www I hope that your query had been solved. -
It's very likely that the "index.html" version is more authoritative because you're using it in internal links. The problem is that that often creates a duplication issue - you refer to the root (non-index.html) version in inbound links, social, etc. (and people tend to link and bookmark the root version), but then link internally to "index.html", so Google will end up indexing both.
If the authority is coming from internal links, and you:
(1) Switch the internal links to the root ("/")
(2) 301-redirect "index.html" to the root ("/")
...you shouldn't lose any authority, as you'll have re-routed it by doing step (1). You'll also consolidate your signals and be better off all-around, IMO.
Kane's right, though - it's a bit tough to tell without knowing the specifics.
-
Redirecting the authoritative link to the less authoritative URL is not ideal.
However, in my opinion being consistent with URLs throughout the site takes precedent.
Implementing 301 redirects will indicate that there has been a permanent relocation of that pages content, and you will get most of the link value from the authoritative link. That said, if you feel comfortable emailing the person who created that authoritative link, it's worth a little effort to ask them to change it, but if it's a hassle to do so, don't push it.
-
How to redirect domain.com/index.html to domain.com/index.html?
Those two URLs are the same, so there is nothing to change. If you wanted to redirect domain.com/index.html to domain.com/ then you would do so with 301 redirects. Here's a guide on getting started:
http://www.seomoz.org/learn-seo/redirection
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/url-rewrites-and-301-redirects-how-does-it-all-work
-
I personally would rewrite & redirect everything using the 2nd option above.
Can you explain me how to do that, please?
How to redirect domain.com/index.html to domain.com?
Thanks
-
thank you for your detailed answer but one more thing does it matter if I redirect a more authoritative link to a weaker one for the benefit of staying consistent and vice versa?
let s say I redirect a non index.html to an index.html and vice versa for the sake of consistency?
-
You should stick with one format across the site:
-
domain.com/index.html and domain.com/subfolder/index.html
**OR **
I typically choose the second option because it is agnostic of CMS or file type, and it looks better in my opinion. I would not mix the two across the site because it causes a confusing user experience.
So, to answer your questions directly:
My logic would tell me to still redirect the non"index.html" to "index.html". Am I right?
No, not necessarily. By telling us that there are examples where .html is more authoritative and there are examples where it isn't as authoritative, it's impossible for us to say which is the better choice. I personally would rewrite & redirect everything using the 2nd option above.
**The same question for www vs non www versions? **
I believe that WWW vs non-WWW is less important. You could decide based upon which format has more links or which one has been historically used. Consistency (using the same across the entire site), proper 301 redirects, and proper rel canonical tags are your priorities here.
-
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
-
Duplicate content, although page has "noindex"
Hello, I had an issue with some pages being listed as duplicate content in my weekly Moz report. I've since discussed it with my web dev team and we decided to stop the pages from being crawled. The web dev team added this coding to the pages <meta name='robots' content='max-image-preview:large, noindex dofollow' />, but the Moz report is still reporting the pages as duplicate content. Note from the developer "So as far as I can see we've added robots to prevent the issue but maybe there is some subtle change that's needed here. You could check in Google Search Console to see how its seeing this content or you could ask Moz why they are still reporting this and see if we've missed something?" Any help much appreciated!
Technical SEO | | rj_dale0 -
Duplicate content for vehicle inventory.
Hey all, In the automotive industry... When uploading vehicle inventory to a website I'm concerned with duplicate content issues. For example, 1 vehicle is uploaded to the main manufacturers website, then again to the actual dealerships website & then again to Craigslist & even sometimes to a group site. The information is all the same, description, notes, car details & images. What would you all recommend for alleviating duplicate content issues? Should I be using the rel canonical back to the manufacturers website? Once the vehicle is sold all pages disappear. Thanks so much for any advice.
Technical SEO | | DCochrane0 -
Is this considered Duplicate Content?
Good Morning, Just wondering if these pages are considered duplicate content? http://goo.gl/t9lkm http://goo.gl/mtfbf Can you please take a look and advise if it is considered duplicate and if so, what should i do to fix... Thanks
Technical SEO | | Prime850 -
Duplicate Content on Product Pages
Hello I'm currently working on two sites and I had some general question's about duplicate content. For the first one each page is a different location, but the wording is identical on each; ie it says Instant Remote Support for Critical Issues, Same Day Onsite Support with a 3-4 hour response time, etc. Would I get penalized for this? Another question i have is, we offer Antivirus support for providers ie Norton, AVG,Bit Defender etc. I was wondering if we will get penalized for having the same first paragraph with only changing the name of the virus provider on each page? My last question is we provide services for multiple city's and towns in various states. Will I get penalized for having the same content on each page, such as towns and producuts and services we provide? Thanks.
Technical SEO | | ilyaelbert0 -
Duplicate content issue. Delete index.html and replace with www.?
I have a duplicate content issue. On my site the home button goes to the index.html and not the www. If I change it to the www will it impact my SERPS? I don't think anyone links to the index.html.
Technical SEO | | bronxpad1 -
Duplicate content and http and https
Within my Moz crawl report, I have a ton of duplicate content caused by identical pages due to identical pages of http and https URL's. For example: http://www.bigcompany.com/accomodations https://www.bigcompany.com/accomodations The strange thing is that 99% of these URL's are not sensitive in nature and do not require any security features. No credit card information, booking, or carts. The web developer cannot explain where these extra URL's came from or provide any further information. Advice or suggestions are welcome! How do I solve this issue? THANKS MOZZERS
Technical SEO | | hawkvt10 -
Is 100% duplicate content always duplicate?
Bit of a strange question here that would be keen on getting the opinions of others on. Let's say we have a web page which is 1000 lines line, pulling content from 5 websites (the content itself is duplicate, say rss headlines, for example). Obviously any content on it's own will be viewed by Google as being duplicate and so will suffer for it. However, given one of the ways duplicate content is considered is a page being x% the same as another page, be it your own site or someone elses. In the case of our duplicate page, while 100% of the content is duplicate, the page is no more than 20% identical to another page so would it technically be picked up as duplicate. Hope that makes sense? My reason for asking is I want to pull latest tweets, news and rss from leading sites onto a site I am developing. Obviously the site will have it's own content too but also want to pull in external.
Technical SEO | | Grumpy_Carl0 -
Duplicate Content and Canonical use
We have a pagination issue, which the developers seem reluctant (or incapable) to fix whereby we have 3 of the same page (slightly differing URLs) coming up in different pages in the archived article index. The indexing convention was very poorly thought up by the developers and has left us with the same article on, for example, page 1, 2 and 3 of the article index, hence the duplications. Is this a clear cut case of using a canonical tag? Quite concerned this is going to have a negative impact on ranking, of course. Cheers Martin
Technical SEO | | Martin_S0