Canonical Question
-
Our site has thousands of items, however using the old "Widgets" analogy we are unsure on how to implement the canonical tag, and if we need to at all.
At the moment our main product pages lists all different "widget" products on one page, however the user can visit other sub pages that filter out the different versions of the product.
I.e. glass widgets (20 products)
glass blue widgets (15 products)
glass red widgets (5 products)
etc....I.e. plastic widgets (70 products)
plastic blue widgets (50 products)
plastic red widgets (20 products)
etc....As the sub pages are repeating products from the main widgets page we added the canonical tag on the sub pages to refer to the main widget page. The thinking is that Google wont hit us with a penalty for duplicate content.
As such the subpages shouldnt rank very well but the main page should gather any link juice from these subpages?
Typically once we added the canonical tag it was coming up to the penguin update, lost a 20%-30% of our traffic and its difficult not to think it was the canonical tag dropping our subpages from the serps.
Im tempted to remove the tag and return to how the site used to be repeating products on subpages.. not in a seo way but to help visitors drill down to what they want quickly.
Any comments would be welcome..
-
Thanks, as i thought the issue is something that cannot be answered until its done. I am going to leave the tag in for the moment as we are still ranking for keywords.
Will however watch traffic closely and compare over next to previous landing pages.
Thanks for the comment.
-
Technically, Google doesn't recommend the canonical tag in these situations, but it's a gray area. They do say that you can set a canonical to the "View All" version in paginated search results, and you've got something similar here - each sub-page is a sub-set of the full results.
Other options are to simply META NOINDEX the break-down pages or tell Google to ignore the parameters in GWT. Unfortunately, it really depends a lot on the situation and URL/crawl structure, so it's a bit hard to speak in generalities.
I'd be very surprised if this caused you any kind of Penguin problems. I've seen bad canonicalization cause problems in general, but it's probably just coincidental timing here. The biggest risk would be if you had direct traffic/links to the sub-pages. The canonical should pass most of the link-juice, but if a lot of people were running queries like "glass blue widgets" and "plastic red widgets" then canonicalizing those back up to the root page may have weakened your ranking ability.
It's a tough call - often, cleaning up these kinds of near-duplicate pages can be helpful, but it really depends a lot on your audiences and the nature of your traffic. Can you isolate the lost traffic? See if it was coming directly to these deeper pages or via long-tail keywords. If it was, it's very likely cutting off these pages caused some harm. If you've lost ranking on broad keywords or across all pages, then I suspect something else is going on.
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 Tags for Legacy Duplicate Content
I've got a lot of duplicate pages, especially products, and some are new but most have been like this for a long time; up to several years. Does it makes sense to use a canonical tag pointing to one master page for each product. Each page is slightly different with a different feature and includes maybe a sentence or two that is unique but everything else is the same.
Technical SEO | | AmberHanson0 -
If you use canonicals do the meta descriptions need to be different?
For example, we have 3 different subsites with the same pages. We will put canonicals so they reference the main pages. Do the meta descriptions have to be different for each of the three pages? How does Google handle meta data when using canonicals?
Technical SEO | | Shirley.Fenlason0 -
how to set rel canonical on wordpress.com sites
I know how to do this with a wordpress.org site but I have a client that does not want to switch and without a plugin I am lost. any help would be greatly appreciated. Jeremy Wood
Technical SEO | | SOtBOrlando0 -
Website Hierarchy Question / Discussion
Hey all, I am looking to get the opinions off the community to help settle a discussion / debate. We are looking at how a site is laid out and which is the preferred method. There are two options: www.site.com --> /category-page --> /product-page (With this option, you always have the domain name and then page, no matter where in the site you actually are, and how many clicks it took you to get there). Your URL to the end page here would be www.site.com/product-page www.site.com --> /category-page --> /category-page/product-page --> (With this option, you into a defined structure). Your URL to the end page here would be www.site.com/category-page/product-page If you have a moment, I would be interested to know your views on which you would consider to be your preferred method and why. Thanks, Andy
Technical SEO | | Andy.Drinkwater0 -
Questionable SEO
Chess Telecom appears first when you search for 'business phone lines' in the UK so I used a campaign to check them out. It seems they've got tons of unrelated links and using comment spamming to increase their ranking. Along with fake twitter accounts and other things. Search for 'jewel jubic chess' and you'll see what i mean. I assumed this wasnt a good idea and been trying to get my link on relevant websites only. Any comments or suggestions? Should I simply trust that google will hopefully punish them eventually? Or should I be fighting fire with fire? Thanks Dan
Technical SEO | | DanFromUK0 -
2 questions about linkbuilding
1. Are these types of sites bad to submit a link to? http://www.mompack.com/mom2mom/ 2. If I submit my product for another blog to review (in turn they write a post for me with links to my website), is this GOOD? Look forward to hearing back from you, thanks
Technical SEO | | ChrisTS0 -
Google Places Question......
Hi Guys. I am working with a photographer they do not have a studio they shoot on location. However I noticed many photographers within their industry have their home address listed in their google places, and they too shoot on location. My client doesn't want their home address listed so I wondered what options there would be? Do you think renting mail forwarding address would suffice?
Technical SEO | | RankStealer0 -
Very Quick Joomla Question
Hi, A client's site was previously built in Joomla and he wants us to reproduce content that was in there, but the Joomla site is no longer live and has come to me as an archive containing all the files and folders that were included. So, I am looking at the files and folders without Joomla installed. Can someone tell me quickly how to find the where the actual page content was stored? I started looking, but there are some folders I cannot open and nothing that looks as I expected. Would appreciate a hint or two from someone who knows Joomla well.. Life is too short! Thanks Sha
Technical SEO | | ShaMenz0