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
-
When rel canonical tag used, which page does Google considers for ranking and indexing? A/B test scenario!
Hi Moz community, We have redesigned our website and launched for A/B testing using canonical tags from old website to new website pages, so there will be no duplicate content issues and new website will be shown to the half of the website visitors successfully to calculate the metrics. However I wonder how actually Google considers it? Which pages Google will crawl and index to consider for ranking? Please share your views on this for better optimisation. Thanks
Web Design | | vtmoz0 -
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 -
Fetch as Google not showing Waypoints.js on scroll animation
So I noticed that my main content underneath 4 reasons to choose LED Habitats did not show up in Fetch as Google as well as a few other sections. The site being brand new, so I'm not sure how this will be indexed. What happens is, as the user scrolls the content is brought in using Waypoints and Animate.css which offers an engaging yet simple user experience. I'm just afraid that If the content doesn't show up in "Fetch as Google" in webmaster tools that this content will never be found / indexed by Google. There are thousands of sites that use this library, I'm just curious what I'm doing wrong.. or what I can do. Is there a way for me to keep the simple animations but keep Google Happy at the same time? I took a screen shot of "Fetch as Google" and you can see blatant missing sections which are the sections animated by the waypoints library. Thanks for listening! Robert ZqgLWHi
Web Design | | swarming0 -
Should Our Mobile Responsive Version of our Ecommerce Site include the on Page content to Help with Rankings
Hello All, We are soon to launch our new redesigned website along with a mobile responsive version but i have noticed we currently don't include the on page Content we have on the mobile version which we have on the desktop version to help with rankings etc. I am not sure how google does mobile research with regards to rankings. We have designed our responsive version to be as user friendly as possible at the expense of having to much clutter/content but I am wondering now , if we will rank on mobile if all our on page content isn't present. Just wondered if we should include it at the bottom of the pages with say a "Read more" extension to help avoid clutter? Any advice greatly appreciated thanks Pete
Web Design | | PeteC120 -
Google text-only vs rendered (index and ranking)
Hello, can someone please help answer a question about missing elements from Google's text-only cached version.
Web Design | | cpawsgo
When using JavaScript to display an element which is initially styled with display:none, does Google index (and most importantly properly rank) the elements contents? Using Google's "cache:" prefix followed by our pages url we can see the rendered cached page. The contents of the element in question are viewable and you can read the information inside. However, if you click the "Text-only version" link on the top-right of Google’s cached page, the element is missing and cannot be seen. The reason for this is because the element is initially styled with display:none and then JavaScript is used to display the text once some logic is applied. Doing a long-tail Google search for a few sentences from inside the element does find the page in the results, but I am not certain that is it being cached and ranked optimally... would updating the logic so that all the contents are not made visible by JavaScript improve our ranking or can we assume that since Google does return the page in its results that everything is proper? Thank you!0 -
Best way to add Google Analytics to a Joomla!
I am having difficulties installing (and getting it to work) google analytics to Joomla! 2.5.8 site. I have it working on some sites but then not on others even though I have installed it the same. Is there a recommended or easy way to do this that works?
Web Design | | Atlanta-SMO1 -
Does disabling the "View Source" functionality prevent Google from crawling a website?
I know Google uses a lot of variables when crawling a website. I wasn't sure if disabling the "View Source" option hindered anything.
Web Design | | innovationsimple0 -
Google cache and rel alternate
http://groups.google.com/a/googleproductforums.com/forum/#!searchin/webmasters/rel$20alternate$20not$20works/webmasters/xzwTBJemPss/LyRjRCigZdYJ http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=189077
Web Design | | ctam
Situation:www.example.ca - canadian IP and https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/settings:"Your site's domain is currently associated with the target: Canada" - done long time ago.<head><link rel="canonical" href="http://www.example.ca/" /> <link< span="">rel="alternate" hreflang="en-us" href="http://www.example.com/" /></link<><link rel="alternate" hreflang="en-ca" href="http://www.example.ca/" /><link rel="alternate" hreflang="en" href="http://www.example.com/" />```
www.example.com - US IP and
https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/settings:
"Geographic target Target users in: United States" done long time ago.
<head><link rel="canonical" href="http://www.example.com/" /> <link< span="">rel="alternate" hreflang="en-us" href="http://www.example.com/" /><link rel="alternate" hreflang="en-ca" href="http://www.example.ca/" />
<link rel="alternate" hreflang="en" href="http://www.example.com/" /> Differences: Prices and some minor changes in design. cache:www.example.com - shows .ca version,
with snapshot's date after rel="alternate" had been added.
Results: In usexample.com pages do not appear in search results.
Some times www.example.ca pages do,
but they are even close so well ranked as example.com pages before. Question: What we are doing wrong?</link<>0