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.
Adding Rel Canonical to multiple pages
-
Hi,
Our CMS generates a lot of duplicate content, (Different versions of every page for 3 different font sizes). There are many other reasons why we should drop this current CMS and go with something else, and we are in the process of doing that. But for now, does anyone know how would I do the following:
I've created a spreadsheet that contains the following:
Column 1: rel="canonical" tag for URL
Column 2: Duplicate Content URL # 1
Column 3: Duplicate Content URL # 2
Column 4: Duplicate Content URL # 3
I want to add the tag from column 1 into the head of every page from column 2,3, and 4.
What would be a fast way to do this considering that I have around 1800 rows.
Check the screenshot of the builtwith.com result to see more information about the website if that helps.
Farris
-
Yeah, wish I could give you a simpler answer, but I'm afraid it might end up being a little tricky. Hit the biggest problems first, and at least you can manage time/money a bit. The one bright side is that the rules should be no harder to code in ColdFusion than anything else (PHP, ASP, whatever). It's just the core logic that's tricky.
-
That's what I thought. I need to find someone in the company who knows cold fusion and go through it.
Thanks for your help though. I appreciate it.
Farris
-
Unfortunately, the rules may differ from page to page and will be entirely dependent on how your pages are generated. If it's just a matter of the "index.cfm" version vs. root ("/") versions of pages, those canonical should be straightforward. For the other parameters, though (like "i", "fs", etc.), it depends entirely on the function of those parameters.
I know ColdFusion reasonably well, and even given that, I couldn't give you a one-size-fits-all rule that would solve the problem. It really has to be guided by your site structure and code/data logic. Personally, I'd start with the pattern that generates the most problems and solve that one first. In other words, if one template (like "/press-releases") generates dozens or hundreds of duplicates, deal with that first. If you solve the top 3-4 problems, you may clean up quite a bit. That could be more effective than trying to fix everything at once.
-
Here's a spreadsheet sample. I did what Roberto suggested. I have a column with the ready for every duplicate content URL.
The site is dynamic. That was the main problem I was facing, I'm not sure how to set the canonicals on each page without having to go into the html and copy the tag from the spreadsheet to the manually.
I added the screenshot of builtwith.com in the main question hoping it would give anyone insight as to how I would code rules to set the canonicals.
-
Could you provide an approximate example that matches your real situation (a fake domain is fine, but with the same basic format)? This is a situation where fake examples that don't match the real situation probably won't help us (or you) much.
Once you have the spreadsheet, how are you going to translate that into tags? If this is a dynamic site, it would be better to be able to code rules to set the canonicals - and potentially much easier.
-
Following the same concept:
- Create a column (Column E) with the following information "then another column (Column F) with ""/>"
- In column G enter the following formula: =CONCATENATE(E1,Cell of Duplicate URL, F3).
The end result will have Column A with the Domain in it. Follow steps 6 & 7 to complete the process.
Feel free to send me a sample spreadsheet with some info and I can set it up for you.
-
Roberto, Thank you for your answer. I just realized that I was unclear when I asked the question. I already have the link containing the canonical tag for each of the URLs ready. That is what column A already contains. I need to add that into the section of the pages in column 2,3, and 4. I'm just unsure how to do this for 1800 rows each containing the correct URL in column A, and in column 2,3, and 4 the URLs of the duplicate content pages that need the link added to the section. Check the image below to see what I mean. I appreciate the effort though Farris
-
Farris,
This is the way I would do it.
You have the following columns created:
- Column A: "canonical" tag for UR
- Column B: Duplicate Content URL # 1
- Column
Duplicate Content URL # 2 - Column
Duplicate Content URL # 1
Follow the next steps:
- Create three more columns with to duplicate columns B, C, D
- Use the following formula on column B "**=CONCATENATE(A1,B1)" **
- Copy the same formula for columns C & D
- Replace the “B1” in your formula for the respective columns (i.e. Column C should have C1.)
- Copy & Paste the content of columns E, F, G (The copied columns with formulas) to all the rows.
- Once copied, the information in columns E, F, G should look like the end result that you want.
- if data is correct, copy columns E, F, G and paste in the same location but use Paste Special and paste values only. This will remove your formulas.
I hope this helps.
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
-
Rel=Canonical For Landing Pages
We have PPC landing pages that are also ranking in organic search. We've decided to create new landing pages that have been improved to rank better in natural search. The PPC team however wants to use their original landing pages so we are unable to 301 these pages to the new pages being created. We need to block the old PPC pages from search. Any idea if we can use rel=canonical? The difference between old PPC page and new landing page is much more content to support keyword targeting and provide value to users. Google says it's OK to use rel=canonical if pages are similar but not sure if this applies to us. The old PPC pages have 1 paragraph of content followed by featured products for sale. The new pages have 4-5 paragraphs of content and many more products for sale. The other option would be to add meta noindex to the old PPC landing pages. Curious as to what you guys think. Thanks.
Technical SEO | | SoulSurfer80 -
Will Adding Publish Date at end of Page Title for Blog posts Hurt SEO?
I'd like to be able to easily track blog posts by month but in Google reports when you set a date range obviously older blog post still appear and with amount of blog posts we generate without seeing the date in the title it's not obvious what was published and when it was published. For example if a Blog Title was "/dangers-of-sharing-KM-knowledge-01-11-15 would it hurt SEO? The reason is I'd like to have a quick way to know how new posts do each month compared to older content
Technical SEO | | inhouseninja0 -
How Does Google's "index" find the location of pages in the "page directory" to return?
This is my understanding of how Google's search works, and I am unsure about one thing in specific: Google continuously crawls websites and stores each page it finds (let's call it "page directory") Google's "page directory" is a cache so it isn't the "live" version of the page Google has separate storage called "the index" which contains all the keywords searched. These keywords in "the index" point to the pages in the "page directory" that contain the same keywords. When someone searches a keyword, that keyword is accessed in the "index" and returns all relevant pages in the "page directory" These returned pages are given ranks based on the algorithm The one part I'm unsure of is how Google's "index" knows the location of relevant pages in the "page directory". The keyword entries in the "index" point to the "page directory" somehow. I'm thinking each page has a url in the "page directory", and the entries in the "index" contain these urls. Since Google's "page directory" is a cache, would the urls be the same as the live website (and would the keywords in the "index" point to these urls)? For example if webpage is found at wwww.website.com/page1, would the "page directory" store this page under that url in Google's cache? The reason I want to discuss this is to know the effects of changing a pages url by understanding how the search process works better.
Technical SEO | | reidsteven750 -
Splitting Page Authority with two URLs for the same page.
Hello guys, My website is currently holding two different URLs for the same page and I am under the impression such set up is dividing my Page Authority and Link Juice. We currently have the following page with both URLs below: www.wbresearch.com/soldiertechnologyusa/home.aspx
Technical SEO | | JoaoPdaCosta-WBR
www.wbresearch.com/soldiertechnologyusa/ Analysing the page authority and backlinks I identified that we are splitting the amount of backlinks (links from sites, social media and therefore authority). "/home.aspx"
PA: 67
Linking Root Domains: 52
Total Links: 272 "/"
PA: 64
Linking Root Domains: 29
Total Links: 128 I am under the impression that if the URLs were the same we would maximise our backlinks and therefore page authority. My Question: How can I fix this? Should I have a 301 redirect from the page "/" to the "/home.aspx" therefore passing the authority and link juice of “/” directly to “/homes.aspx”? Trying to gather thoughts and ideas on this, suggestions are much appreciated? Thanks!0 -
Can you 301 redirect a page to an already existing/old page ?
If you delete a page (say a sub department/category page on an ecommerce store) should you 301 redirect its url to the nearest equivalent page still on the site or just delete and forget about it ? Generally should you try and 301 redirect any old pages your deleting if you can find suitable page with similar content to redirect to. Wont G consider it weird if you say a page has moved permenantly to such and such an address if that page/address existed before ? I presume its fine since say in the scenario of consolidating departments on your store you want to redirect the department page your going to delete to the existing pages/department you are consolidating old departments products into ?
Technical SEO | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
Rel = prev next AND canonical?
I have product category pages that correctly have the prev next but the moz crawl is giving me duplicate content errors. I would not think I also need to have canonical - but do I ?
Technical SEO | | JohnBerger0 -
Use webmaster tools "change of address" when doing rel=canonical
We are doing a "soft migration" of a website. (Actually it is a merger of two websites). We are doing cross site rel=canonical tags instead of 301's for the first 60-90 days. These have been done on a page by page basis for an entire site. Google states that a "change of address" should be done in webmaster tools for a site migration with 301's. Should this also be done when we are doing this soft move?
Technical SEO | | EugeneF0 -
Internal search : rel=canonical vs noindex vs robots.txt
Hi everyone, I have a website with a lot of internal search results pages indexed. I'm not asking if they should be indexed or not, I know they should not according to Google's guidelines. And they make a bunch of duplicated pages so I want to solve this problem. The thing is, if I noindex them, the site is gonna lose a non-negligible chunk of traffic : nearly 13% according to google analytics !!! I thought of blocking them in robots.txt. This solution would not keep them out of the index. But the pages appearing in GG SERPS would then look empty (no title, no description), thus their CTR would plummet and I would lose a bit of traffic too... The last idea I had was to use a rel=canonical tag pointing to the original search page (that is empty, without results), but it would probably have the same effect as noindexing them, wouldn't it ? (never tried so I'm not sure of this) Of course I did some research on the subject, but each of my finding recommanded one of the 3 methods only ! One even recommanded noindex+robots.txt block which is stupid because the noindex would then be useless... Is there somebody who can tell me which option is the best to keep this traffic ? Thanks a million
Technical SEO | | JohannCR0