Help I don't understand Rel Canonical
-
I'm really stuck on how to fix up Rel Canonical errors on a Wordpress site. I went in and changed all the URLs to remove the www and added / to the end.
I get this message on page analysis details:
<dt>Canonical URL</dt>
<dd>"http://www.some-url.com.au/",</dd>
<dd>"http://some-url..com.au/", and</dd>
<dd>"http://some-url..com.au/"</dd>
<dd>Well the first one with the www doesn't exists and the second two urls are the same! (Note that I have removed the actual URL for this post)</dd>
<dd>I'm not sure how to read and fix the errors from the reports ether. The only issues I can see is that the 'Tag Value' has the www and the 'Page Title - URL' doesn't have the www.
</dd> -
Yeah, unfortunately, on a CMS or template-driven site, it's really easy to put a canonical tag in place that impacts the wrong pages. Hopefully, you caught it in time.
The 270 notices in are system are just telling you that 270 URLs we crawled had a canonical tag pointing to a different page. In this particular case, it was a problem, but it isn't always an issue.
Unfortunately, with the bad canonical tag in place, it's tough to tell why they were there before. This is usually just a notice, and non-critical, but once the bad canonicals clear out, let us know if you're still getting the notice (it may take a couple of weeks to go away).
-
I think I know what I have done wrong. I placed this code line in the header instead of the index:
I only did this last week, so hopefully the damage won't last long. I still don't understand the 270 Rel Cononical errors, because they were already there. Is this a Wordpress problem?
-
I just checked, and it actually looks like you've got a potentially serious problem. All of your canonical tags that I've seen are pointing to the home-page, even archives and blog posts. This will essentially de-index those pages. Something is set up badly - that canonical tag should only appear on the actual home-page.
Since this is public, I won't reveal details, but look at the, for example, the canonical tag on your "About" and "Services" pages - they're pointing to the home-page.
-
So whats the best way to fix the 270 Rel Cononical errors? How do I actually tell Google what URL is the same pages as another URL?
-
The basic problem, and it's actually confusing to a lot of people, is that what you think of as a "page" is the physical file on your server (like your home-page). What Google thinks of as a page is a URL. So, if multiple URLs go to the same place, they look like duplicate copies to Google (who sees them as all different pages).
It's especially common with home-pages, where you can have www vs. non-www, root ("www.example.com") vs. the filename ("www.example.com/index.php"), etc. If those variations get crawled and indexed by Google, the duplicates can dilute your index and weaken your ranking ability. So, rel-canonical helps tell Google that those variations are all the same page.
-
Zapprabbit,
I would like to underline the main reason of canonical tag usage.
We use canonical to eliminate duplicate content which is cause by different paths to the same content.
In order to eliminate this, you point out to search engines which of the paths is the one that you are optimizing for (which path you want to be indexed).
So let's take your example:
<dd>"http://www.some-url.com.au/",</dd>
<dd>"http://some-url..com.au/", and</dd>
<dd>"http://some-url..com.au/"</dd>
All of the above are different versions of the index.php (wordpress), right?Ok so you have the following:Index.php is shown as:
- http://www.some-url.com.au
- http://www.some-url.com.au/
- http://www.some-url.com.au/index.php
- http://some-url.com.au
- http://some-url.com.au/
- http://some-url.com.au/index.php
all the links above are different paths for Search Engines.
Now you put a canonical tag into the header of index.php which point out for "www.some-url.com.au". What happens?
Search Engines now crawl all versions of your index.php, but they know that they only need to index one version: www.some-url.com.au
What happens from link juice point of view?
If people will start linking to http://some-url.com.au/ or http://www.some-url.com.au/index.php or any other version of your index.php file the link juice will be targeted to the canonical version in some portion (aprox. 85% because you will loose some "juice").
I hope that is clearer now
Gr.,
Istvan
-
The bit I'm stuck on is what am I looking for when I click on the Cannonical URL Tag?
Duplicated URLs? Too many URLs pointing to the same place?
I know I must sound stupid but I just can't get my head around the problem.... Any pointers?
-
Hi Zapprabbit, For you to understand the Rel Cannonical errors you must visit the Cannonical URL Tag.
In wordpress these cannonical url errors are fixed up with all in one seo wordpress plugin.
I hope that your query had been solved.
-
Hi Zapprabbit,
You have the following issue:
1. You didn't proper place the canonical
2. you miss the non www. -> www. 301 redirect
So let's take it step by step:
1. Canonicals: In order to have the chance to set the canonicals right, I would advice you to use the Yoast WP plugin. On the same page you will have how-to articles and usage tips for the plug-in.
2. 301 redirect: http://www.webconfs.com/how-to-redirect-a-webpage.php
This should solve your issue.
Gr,
Istvan
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
-
Content that's behind CSS..
For content that's been loaded onto the page.. but it requires a click for it to be revealed.. as in a slider, or a tab, to save space or for a page's organization.. what are your thoughts on Google counting or weighting this content? It would make sense for Google to give it partial or no weighting as if Google attributes the content to being there, its confusion for the user to land on the page and have to find it/click around to find it.. Sorry if this is an obvious question to SEOs.. I've always assumed as long as it was loaded, it'd be mostly counted.. but I'm beginning to doubt my assumption. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | speedcommerce0 -
How can you activate the 'Results From' internal search bar on Google SERP?
Hi There, I am hoping someone can advise me on getting the 'Results From' sitelink to display for my site on the Google SERP? I have searched far and wide for the answer with no luck. I'd really appreciate your advice. Thanks! Internal_Search_Google_SERP_zps75a5383e.jpg
On-Page Optimization | | tmg.seo0 -
Tips and Tricks on yoast's video seo upgrade!
Hello Guys, I am using Yoast for several websites, and videos. I have a video sitemap and for all videos i added: 1. Titles 2. Descriptions 3. Tags My question is: Is the there any way or do anything to rank these videos higher?
On-Page Optimization | | DexSmart0 -
Image alt tags shouldn't contain keywords?
Hi Everyone, I've been informed recently that keyword within your image alt tags can be a trigger for penguin if you have your keyword mentioned too often on the page (over-optimisation). I'm not sure I understand why though, the reason for this is, we have a page which features a picture and a description of a product. The page title, heading, a mention in content and image alt all contain a keyword which is the product name. I've been told to remove these alt tags but aren't alt tags important for screen readers and other W3C complacency issues, so removing the product names from the alt (which also happens to be the keyword for the product pages but is best describing what the image is) would make these image useless to users with certain disabilities, so if its true that doing this can be a negative signal isn't this breaking googles guidelines by not providing good content for those users? Would it be better to remove these alt tags or attempt to remove keyword elsewhere on the page? or can anyone suggest something else? Thanks in advance.
On-Page Optimization | | AMA-DataSet0 -
Google's view on geolocated results
Hello everyone, I am working on a project so the website is not online at the moment. My question is about Google's view on geolocated results : on the mainpage of the website, a bloc will be displaying local classifieds according to where the visitor is located. What will be Google's view on this bloc as it has no location ? A white empty bloc ? Bonus question : do you have any experience regarding this kind of situation ? How do you best deal with it in your opinion ? Thanks for your help ! Best Regards, Raphael
On-Page Optimization | | Pureshore0 -
How do I cure 'overly dynamic' url's on an e-commerce website?
I've just launched an e-commerce website selling hosiery and have received aa report from SEO Moz regarding overly dynamic URL's. How do I resolve this issue - in words of one syllable please, I'm new to SEO! Here are three exapmles of over 120: http://www.yosassy.com/index.php?route=product/category&path=1&page=2 http://www.yosassy.com/index.php?route=product/product&filter_tag=&page=1&product_id=57 http://www.yosassy.com/index.php?route=product/product&filter_tag=&page=1&product_id=64 Thank you.
On-Page Optimization | | lindsayjhopkins0 -
Is reported duplication on the pages or their canonical pages?
There are several sections getting flagged for duplication on one of our sites: http://mysite.com/section-1/?something=X&confirmed=true
On-Page Optimization | | Safelincs
http://mysite.com/section-2/?something=X&confirmed=true
http://mysite.com/section-3/?something=X&confirmed=true Each of the above are showing as having duplicates of the other sections. Indeed, these pages are exactly the same (it's just an SMS confirmation page you enter your code in), however, they all have canonical links back to the section (without the query string), i.e. section-1, section-2 and section-3 respectively. These three sections have unique content and aren't flagged up for duplications themselves, so my questions are: Are the pages with the query strings the duplicates, and if so why are the canonical links being ignored? or Are the canonical pages without the query strings the duplicates, and if so why don't they appear as URLs in their own right in the duplicate content report? I am guessing it's the former, but I can't figure out why it would ignore the canonical links. Any ideas? Thanks0 -
Implementing rel=canonical in a CMS
Hi Guys, We have an issue with duplicate content caused by dynamic URLs, so want to implement rel=canonical. However this isn't easy due to the way out CMS works. These were pulled from SEOMoz scan: http://www.transair.co.uk/pp+Aerobatics-Training+463
On-Page Optimization | | brightonseorob
http://www.transair.co.uk/pp+Aerobatics-Training+463?page=1&perpage=10&sales_group=NULL&filter_colour=&filter_size=&sortby=RELEV&inStock=NO&resfilter=
and are obviously the same page. As far as I can see I have two options. 1. To implement the canonical meta tag only on page 1. 2. To implement the canonical tag so that I add ?page=X so
http://www.transair.co.uk/pp+Aerobatics-Training+463
would be
http://www.transair.co.uk/pp+Aerobatics-Training+463?page=1 Will this work? Thanks Rob0