Rel canonical Issue
-
I have a huge rel canonical issue showing up on my website, and I'm not sure that I fully understand why. To my knowledge, this is something that comes about when alternate urls are used to link to the same page. However, this is not a technique that I've used with my website, yet it's still raising a flag on just about every page.
Can anyone enlighten me on what's causing this?
Thanks
-
We tag near-duplicates in the system, so I think you've got a combination of factors:
(1) There's only one post on some of the tag pages.
(2) The posts don't have a lot of text, so the "snippet" duplicates about 1/3 to 1/2 of it.
(3) The navigation/code is pretty heavy, compared to content.
Once those tag pages have more posts/snippets, I don't think you'll see problems. Be careful, as you grow, with how many tags you create. Tag searches can start to look a bit thin, and you may want to exclude them (or some of them) from the search index down the road. For now, I think you're probably ok. Once those tags have 3-4 snippets on them, the pages should look a lot better.
-
I'm still learning, so it's a little hard for me to explain. But basically, I have 95 duplicate content warnings. What's coming up is the tag linked to the post and the actual post itself. Which in itself seems like a problem, plus I thought maybe that's related to the rel can. notices.
-
You mean because there's only one entry in that tag result? It's not necessarily a problem, but if you spin out a lot of those tag pages, that content can look a little thin. It's a balancing act. As the site grows, you may want to consider whether or not to let every tag be indexed. Usually, it's only a problem on large sites, though.
-
Hi,
Thanks everyone for the great insight. I think I may have found another problem that's related to this though. I also have a lot of duplicate content warnings, which is also odd. Here's what I found.
Seems like I have tag urls linking to content - for instance:
is this considered being linked to the actual post/perma?
autodebut.com/2012/techart-2012-porsche-911-revealed-at-geneva-motor-show/#more-6382
Could that be causing the problem?
-
donford is correct, I believe the notive is to let you know where the canonicals are as they can be dangerous if you put them in wrong.
-
Hi Dorian,
To my knowledge the Rel Warning from SeoMoz doesn't mean something is wrong, rather that the tag was detected.
I believe this is because if you can, you should properly redirect 301 to the correct URL instead of saying hey don't index this as what you see but what I say (which is what rel canonical does). However, there are cases with dynamic URL's this isn't always avoidable so the tag does server a purpose.
-
Having a quick look on your website, the use of canonical tag looks fine. What exactly is the problem you are having ?
-
SEOmoz pro just finished crawling my website and it's coming up with 250 rel canonical warnings.
Here's one example:
"
<dt>Description</dt>
<dt>Using rel=canonical suggests to search engines which URL should be seen as canonical."</dt>
<dt>That's all it's saying. I also have metarobots set to noodp,noydir - but I'm sure that doesn't make any difference with this.</dt>
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
-
Canonical question - Would this create some sort of crawler redirection loop?
What happens if a canonical link, links to the url with / but the main url does not have the / For example: rel="canonical" href="https://www.exampleURL.co.uk/"> Main URL - https://www.exampleURL.co.uk (without the /) 301 Redirect https://www.exampleURL.co.uk/ to https://www.exampleURL.co.uk Would this create some sort of crawler redirection loop?
On-Page Optimization | | Evosite10 -
What is the correct code to write the rel=canonical in the HTML HEAD of the page?
is it like: html> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="http://example.com/" /> head> <body> ...<ref>sdfdfref> or like:
On-Page Optimization | | dubraverd0 -
Sudden drop in ranking for important keyword? No penalty / other issues detected
Hi For our site we previously ranked well for the term "botswana safari holidays" on the page: http://www.naturalworldsafaris.com/destinations/africa-and-the-indian-ocean/botswana.aspx We've suddenly seen a dramatic drop for this term, currently ranked #43 on Google UK. There are no penalty notices in Webmaster tools and the only edits to the page recently have been to include the term "Botswana safari holidays" in the page title and the on-page h2 (previously Botswana safaris and holidays). Any suggestions why we have seen a large decrease for this term? We expect to see some fluctuation but this one seems a bit dramatic. We've not lost any backlinks to the page that we know of. Thanks for the help.
On-Page Optimization | | KateWaite0 -
Experiences with pagination rel=next and prev
I have read about people saying that using the rel next and prev tags did not take any positive effect on their sites... In my case I do not have a typical pagination 1,2,3 but a site about tours in the amazon where each tour-description is divided into a page with an overview, itinerary, Dates & Prices so instead of Site 1,2,3 Buttons I have the Btns: Tour Overview, Itinerary, Prices So as all the of pages belong together I thought the rel=next & prev tags will be useful.
On-Page Optimization | | inlinear
Also I want to avoid duplicate content when the page title of the three is pretty similar. Right now the Title is like this:
Amazon Tour XXX YYYY
Amazon Tour XXX - itinerary
Amazon Tour XXX - prices The description text is more different... Is this the best practice in my case? Thanks for all your opinions! 🙂 best regards,
Holger0 -
Duplicate content issue
Hello, I got duplicate content issue on my home page : examplesite.com
On-Page Optimization | | digitalkiddie
examplesite.com/index.html Those page urls are with duplicate content. If in index.html i use 301 redirect like that : Header( "HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently" );
Header( "Location: http://examplesite.com" );
?> would i loose any page authority ? sorry for the newbie question0 -
Can't canonical, but need pages to show in Google News
We are a news media site in which much of our content is third-party, and already published by several other sources. Our current version of our CMS doesn't expose head tags, so I can't canonical to the original and avoid a duplicate content penalty. Is it ok for news sites NOT to use canonical, or do I have to NOINDEX until our CMS is fixed?
On-Page Optimization | | Aggie0 -
Duplicate Content- Best Practise Usage of the canonical url
Canonical urls stop self competition - from duplicate content. So instead of a 2 pages with a rank of 5 out of 10, it is one page with a rank of 7 out of 10.
On-Page Optimization | | WMA
However what disadvantages come from using canonical urls. For example am I excluding some products like green widet, blue widget. I have a customer with 2 e-commerce websites(selling different manufacturers of a type jewellery). Both websites have massive duplicate content issues.
It is a hosted CMS system with very little SEO functionality, no plugins etc. The crawling report- comes back with 1000 of pages that are duplicates. It seems that almost every page on the website has a duplicate partner or more. The problem starts in that they have 2 categorys for each product type, instead of one category for each product type.
A wholesale category and a small pack category. So I have considered using a canonical url or de-optimizing the small pack category as I believe it receives less traffic than the whole category. On the original website I tried de- optimizing one of the pages that gets less traffic. I did this by changing the order of the meta title(keyword at the back, not front- by using small to start of with). I also removed content from the page. This helped a bit. Or I was thinking about just using a canonical url on the page that gets less traffic.
However what are the implications of this? What happens if some one searches for "small packs" of the product- will this no longer be indexed as a page. The next problem I have is the other 1000s of pages that are showing as duplicates. These are all the different products within the categories. The CMS does not have a front office that allows for canonical urls to be inserted. Instead it would have to be done going into the html of the pages. This would take ages. Another issue is that these product pages are not actually duplicate, but I think it is because they have such little content- that the rodger(seo moz crawler, and probably googles one too) cant tell the difference.
Also even if I did use the canonical url - what happened if people searched for the product by attributes(the variations of each product type)- like blue widget, black widget, brown widget. Would these all be excluded from Googles index.
On the one hand I want to get rid of the duplicate content, but I also want to have these pages included in the search. Perhaps I am taking too idealistic approach- trying to optimize a website for too many keywords. Should I just focus on the category keywords, and forget about product variations. Perhaps I look into Google Analytics, to determine the top landing pages, and which ones should be applied with a canonical. Also this website(hosted CMS) seems to have more duplicate content issues than I have seen with other e-commerce sites that I have applied SEO MOZ to On final related question. The first website has 2 landing pages- I think this is a techical issue. For example www.test.com and www.test.com/index. I realise I should use a canonical url on the page that gets less traffic. How do I determine this? (or should I just use the SEO MOZ Page rank tool?)0 -
Ranking Issues Recently Popping Up
We have a site that based on your research tools, holds its own in almost all aspects in regards to # of links, # of different linking domains, quality of links, mozrank, moztrust and all that stuff. Compared to our top competitors, we do very well based on your tools via our campaign monitor. The issue is we seem to be dropping like crazy every month in our rankings and traffic despite this fact, and we can't get our head around the cause. I do have a couple of ideas, and I wanted to run them by you guys to get your opinion. Domain: bonitaj.com My Thoughts On Possible Issues... 1. Text Content & Panda Update I know one of the big things with the panda update was quality of content. I know one thing we have for sure is a lack of "text-based" content. Sure, we have home page, main cats, sub-cats and product pages, but they are mostly just windows into the product pages, and don't have a whole lot of good copy. THIS IS MOST EVIDENT ON OUR PRODUCT PAGES, where each product page is loaded with content, but only 3-4 very short paragraphs of text. Do you think this is hurting us? THE ONLY ISSUE IS THAT our competitors also don't have a whole lot of text-based content on their pages. 2. Too Many Category Pages & Same Products Featured Somewhat on them I think another problem may be that on each category page, we do have a lot of the same products featured. I don't think its crazy duplicate content or anything, but I do think that back in the old days we got a little crazy with creating "niched out" category pages that pretty much feature the same products as some of the more important and base category pages. Do you think this is hurting us? I've pitched a solution to this that involves trying to tone down the amount of sub-cats we feature that were originally geared towards attracting long-tail traffic. In the end that really isn't working anymore anyway, so maybe we're spreading our site thin by going to deep with some of these niche category pages? 3. Lack of a sitemap? We used to use an xml sitemap, and really don't anymore. We have nothing on file with google webmaster tools. I've recently read in one of your blog posts that a simple thing like adding a good sitemap could help our 600+ page site or so get crawled a bit deeper allowing more pages to rank? IN THE END, MY QUESTION IS SIMPLY, IF THERE IS ONE OR TWO THINGS I CAN DO TO GET OVER THIS HUMP, WHAT WOULD YOU SUGGEST?
On-Page Optimization | | AarcMediaGroup0