Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Google also indexed trailing slash version - PLEASE HELP
-
Hi Guys,
We redesigned the website and somehow our canonical extension decided to add a trailing slash to all URLs. Previously our canonical URLs didn't have a trailing slash.
During the redesign we haven't changed the URLs. They remained same but we have now two versions indexed. One with trailing slash one without.
I've now fixed the issue and removed the the trailing slash from canonical URLs.
Is this the correct way of fixing it? Will our rankings be effected in a negative way?
Is there anything else I need to do.
The website went live last Tuesday.
Thanks
-
Thats great! The canonical URLs are showing URLs without slash as they are probably reflecting their original URL which is without slash. Hope Google clears them soon..
-
Seems like you got the 301-redirect resolved below - if you've got that in place and fixed the canonical tag, it should be ok. It'll just take some time (usually longer than you'd like) for Google to clear out the pages, especially the deeper ones. If you see gradual de-indexation, though, you'll probably be fine.
-
-
Actual rel="canonical" tags.
-
As soon as we relised everything was fixed. Canonical tag is showing urls without slash and also aplied to htaccess to redirect slash version to non slash version.
<cite>we're using www.shopify.com</cite>
-
-
Could you clarify a couple of things:
(1) When you say canonical URLs, do you mean your internal links, or the actual URLs in your rel="canonical" tags?
(2) If it was just the canonical tags, is everything consistent now (tags, internal links, etc.)?
Since both version will resolve, just fixing the canonical tags (if that's the issue) should be enough - it's just going to take a little time. They should be as effective as a 301-redirect in this case. Either way, though, it can take Google a while to kick out the duplicates. I'd just monitor the index closely and make sure the top-level pages are clearing up (i.e. your home-page and major category duplicates should be disappearing). If that's happening, you're ok - you just need to wait a bit. If that's not happening, then you may have some other mixed signals in play.
-
You are welcome.
Well, the first time you did submit the sitemap right, but now since Google has found new URLs on your website and indexed them, it would be good to notify the big G that they are no longer a part of your website and resubmitting would not hurt.
About the redirections, Google does take a bit of time to understand that the URLs have permanently moved and will gradually remove them from the index. So, keep checking the index for the trailing slash URLs and when they are gone, you can remove the redirections.
Cheers,
-
Thanks a lot.
Now when i click the slash version of the indexed URL from google goes to nonslash version. So it seems we're safe now.
The other thing is when I submitted the sitemap.xml after launch it was without slash. Also all internal links are targeting nonslash URLs. I think google should understand that this is a technical issue and now it has been solved.
When should i remove that redirect?
-
Yups, its done. Just need to be sure if the Home Page is fine. The indexed version of the Home Page stays as it is without any redirection.
Cheers,
-
I checked with this website: http://www.internetofficer.com/seo-tool/redirect-check/
It says:
http://www.mydomain.com/jason.html/
Type of redirect: 301 Moved Permanently
http://www.mydomain.com/jason.html
So looks as if it's done the job. Right?
-
Sounds good, do keep a check to make it 100% sure. I believe the SE's will be fine now.
Cheers,
-
RewriteRule ^([^/]+/)*([^/.]+).html/ http://www.mydomain.com/$2.html [R=301,L]
Looks like above did the trick
-
I think some of these posts can help you understand:
http://html5boilerplate.com/docs/Proper-usage-of-trailing-slash-redirects/
Do try this a test environment and take a backup of the .htaccess file before making any changes, Have it go through a programmer.
Cheers,
-
Please can you tell me how to redirect urls with slash to non slash urls using .htaccess.
-
Jvalops,
This is a common scenario in SEO when you have 2 versions indexed of the same URL. This bascially creates a duplicate issue. Now, this situation has a solution which includes 2 things to implement:
1. Fix it from the search engines's perspective.
2. Make changes at the server level.
You did remove the trailing slash so you fixed it at the server level but you left the search engines to think - Where did the URL go? Am I supposed to show a 404 for that or what?.
So, it is important that you first fix them for the SE's and then make any server level changes because you never know how quick the crawlers can re-visit the disappeared URL and take their own action. Since this is just a recent change I hope that the SE;s will not evaluate it in a negative way but you should be quick to inform them. Now, since you have already removed it, do add a code in the .htaccess file stating that any URL with a slash redirects it to the URL without slash. I hope there are no URLs that have to end with a slash (just have a re-look on this, the home page and others).
After this is done, to make things more clear to the search engines, resubmit your XML sitemap with all the correct URLs on the website and I think you will be just fine.
On the rankings, I don't think it will be affected, unless there was a re-crawl after the indexation.
Cheers,
-
I'm not 100% sure how to answer your question, but an .htaccess 301 might work.
/example.html/ example.html
Try that to see if it works.
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
-
How to prevent development website subdomain from being indexed?
Hello awesome MOZ Community! Our development team uses a sub-domain "dev.example.com" for our SEO clients' websites. This allows changes to be made to the dev site (U/X changes, forms testing, etc.) for client approval and testing. An embarrassing discovery was made. Naturally, when you run a "site:example.com" the "dev.example.com" is being indexed. We don't want our clients websites to get penalized or lose killer SERPs because of duplicate content. The solution that is being implemented is to edit the robots.txt file and block the dev site from being indexed by search engines. My questions is, does anyone in the MOZ Community disagree with this solution? Can you recommend another solution? Would you advise against using the sub-domain "dev." for live and ongoing development websites? Thanks!
Web Design | | SproutDigital0 -
Problems preventing Wordpress attachment pages from being indexed and from being seen as duplicate content.
Hi According to a Moz Crawl, it looks like the Wordpress attachment pages from all image uploads are being indexed and seen as duplicate content..or..is it the Yoast sitemap causing it? I see 2 options in SEO Yoast: Redirect attachment URLs to parent post URL. Media...Meta Robots: noindex, follow I set it to (1) initially which didn't resolve the problem. Then I set it to option (2) so that all images won't be indexed but search engines would still associate those images with their relevant posts and pages. However, I understand what both of these options (1) and (2) mean, but because I chose option 2, will that mean all of the images on the website won't stand a chance of being indexed in search engines and Google Images etc? As far as duplicate content goes, search engines can get confused and there are 2 ways for search engines
Web Design | | SEOguy1
to reach the correct page content destination. But when eg Google makes the wrong choice a portion of traffic drops off (is lost hence errors) which then leaves the searcher frustrated, and this affects the seo and ranking of the site which worsens with time. My goal here is - I would like all of the web images to be indexed by Google, and for all of the image attachment pages to not be indexed at all (Moz shows the image attachment pages as duplicates and the referring site causing this is the sitemap url which Yoast creates) ; that sitemap url has been submitted to the search engines already and I will resubmit once I can resolve the attachment pages issues.. Please can you advise. Thanks.0 -
Help with Schema.org on Ecommerce Products
I’m looking for ways of using schema.org with products that have pricing options. There appear to be two main problems 1) Whilst colour, width, height and depth are all catered for, size appears to be missing – how can we mark up products that are available in sizes that aren’t necessarily covered by width/height/depth (e.g. shoe size). Also, what if the product is available in different finishes – technically, these could not properly be described as colours so how could we mark them up? 2) There doesn’t seem to be any particularly good way of marking up pricing options that are displayed on the same product detail page. For e.g. if a pricing option table is used like this: | ID | Colour | Price 001-red | Red | £3.99 001-green | Green | £4.49 001-blue | Blue | £4.99 | I can mark up each row as an offer, and give each offer a price and sku or mpn, but then I can’t use itemprop=”color” to describe exactly what the option is. Would I just use itemprop=”name” in this case and abandon color altogether (even though it’s technically supposed to be describing the colour of the product and not the name of the offer)? I suppose another way I could approach it would be to mark up each row as an individual product, and assign each one an offer with the details as described above but then the containing page would effectively look like a separate product – which it isn’t. Any help or advice on this would be very much appreciated
Web Design | | paulbaguley0 -
Is it bad to have /index.php at the end of a uri?
Is it bad for SEO if traffic is directed to "http://www.example.com/someuri/index.php" instead of "http://www.example.com/someuri/" and would it be works setting up a redirect rule at htaccess level?
Web Design | | NoisyLittleMonkey1 -
Accordion Fold Ups Bad For Google
http://fandicoach.com/products Right now I have these accordion things on the website. Are they bad for google in terms of being an SEO best practice? I want to avoid doing anything black hat. Thanks!
Web Design | | OOMDODigital0 -
How to put 'Link to this article' HTML code at bottom of article & is it helpful?
Hello, I was thinking about putting a box down at the bottom of my client's main articles that let's the reader easily copy the html code it takes to link to the article they're reading. Maybe I'd put it after the author bio. Do any of you do this? If so, what format do you use? It has to look nice of course. This is a non-techie industry. Thanks.
Web Design | | BobGW0 -
Does Google follow links inside a <noscript>tag?</noscript>
I'm looking at making an embedable calculator and asking users to embed it to their website. I had the idea of using javascript to include the calculator which would also conatain a text link back to my site in order to gain some back links. If it's possible Google won't see the link (as they may not execute the javascript), is it safe to place the link in the <noscript>tag? If so, Will it be indexed and will Page Rank be passed?</span></p> <p>Thanks in advance for your answers. </p> <p>Anthony</p> <p><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><br /></span></p></noscript>
Web Design | | BallyhooLtd0 -
Custom 404 Page Indexing
Hi - We created a custom 404 page based on SEOMoz recommendations. But.... the page seems to be receiving traffic via organic search. Does it make more sense to set this page as "noindex" by its metatag?
Web Design | | sftravel0