Rel=canonical Query
-
Hello Everyone,
We have just launched our new ecommerce site for flooring in the UK.
I have run through the first crawl and there are 549 instances of rel=canonical including the homepage?
Is this a major issue in any way, i have never had to tackle it before and i would appreciate any advice that could be offered on the subject.
Many Thanks
Andrew
-
Andrew
I would essentially suggest to use the crawl report from SEOMoz as a starting point and see which ones translate into real issues and then the effort/reward/prioritize based on time and resources available as well as the importance of that change.
@Maximise is right-on, you can ignore the canonical "warnings". They are more like an FYI.
-
No problem Andrew.
It depends where in the basket area they are. Keep in mind that the search engines won't submit forms or get into any secure areas so those pages would not be worth changing.
-
Many Thanks for your help Maximise,
Yes that is what i was referring to.
That puts my mind at ease a bit, I'm now going to crack on resolving the 75 critical errors and silly mistakes which have also been found, duplicate page titles etc although some of these are in the basket area, are they worth changing?
Kind Regards
Andrew
-
Hi Andrew,
Are you referring to the rel=canonical under the notices section? If so then this is not a problem, it's just showing that there are canonical tags implemented for these pages. You don't need to change anything.
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
-
H Tags Query
Hi, A client I'm dealing with has the following H tags on their homepage: H1: Online POP & POS Printing for Businesses & Events H2: Design & Advertising Agencies? Use Your Own Custom Artwork!
On-Page Optimization | | PeaSoupDigital
H2: Small Businesses & Events? Create Marketing Products Online!
H2: Quicker, Easier & up to 80% Cheaper than Traditional Printing
H2: Customise one of our free themes
H2: Upload your own custom artwork
H2: Commission a bespoke design
H2: Featured Products
H2: Display Printing
H2: Dump Bins
H2: Flyer Display
H2: FSDUs
H2: Hanging Signs
H2: Posters
H2: Shelf Edge
H2: Show Cards
H2: Tent Cards
H2: Window Clings H3: Look How Easy It Is
H3: Look How Easy It Is
H3: Big brand printing for every budget
H3: Newsletter Sign Up
H3: Available payment methods H4: Thank You, You have been added to our mailing list
H4: Follow Us As you can see, there are a lot. I feel the H3 and H4 tags do not really add any value or explain what the site is about, so I'll probably remove these. In relation to the H2s, do you think I should demote some of these to H3 or even H4 tags? Also, terms like 'Posters' is very vague, would this be better as 'Poster Printing'? Thanks, Lewis0 -
Canonical tags in the body?
Hi there, Does anyone know if placing canonical tags in the body instead of the header of a page will still "take"? The system we are on means that making an editable header is no easy business and I was just wondering how big of a difference it makes to have it in a different area. Thank you in advance.
On-Page Optimization | | Whittie0 -
Canonical rel
I am having a few issues understanding the whole report card and canonical issue. I have a wordpress blog www.theseolab.com.au. When i created the blog i had setup http://theseolab.com.au and i thought that was my mistake. When i ran the on page report for www.theseolab.com.au . It said that my canonical was http://theseolab.com. So i changed it and my canonical points to http://www.theseolab.com.au. 5 days later i run the on page again and it still says that there are issues and it still shows that my website canonical is not pointing to the right link. Does it take time to update or am i missing something?
On-Page Optimization | | theseolab0 -
Is Rel=Canonical the answer???
Hey Mozzers, Can you help me with something please. I have some important content going live next week for a client. We work on there blog optimisation and this piece of content is going live on both the blog and parent site. The parent site has huge DA in comparions to the blog. I want to get the traffic directed to the blog and get the blog ranking - bare in mind the content is exactly the same so it is dupe. If I want to get the blog ranking above the parent site and to direct the traffic here is a cross domain Rel=Canonical the answer? Has anyone else had this issue? Thanks Bush
On-Page Optimization | | Bush_JSM0 -
Recommendation: Add a canonical URL tag referencing this URL to the header of the page.
Please clarify: In the page optimization tool, seomoz recommends using the canonical url tag on the unique page itself. Is it the same canonical url tag used when want juice to go to the original page? Although the canonical URL tag is generally thought of as a way to solve duplicate content problems, it can be extremely wise to use it on every (unique) page of a site to help prevent any query strings, session IDs, scraped versions, licensing deals or future developments to potentially create a secondary version and pull link juice or other metrics away from the original. We believe the canonical URL tag is a best practice to help prevent future problems, even if nothing is specifically duplicate/problematic today. Please give example.
On-Page Optimization | | AllIsWell0 -
Dealing with thin content/95% duplicate content - canonical vs 301 vs noindex
My client's got 14 physical locations around the country but has a webpage for each "service area" they operate in. They have a Croydon location. But a separate page for London, Croydon, Essex, Luton, Stevenage and many other places (areas near Croydon) that the Croydon location serves. Each of these pages is a near duplicate of the Croydon page with the word Croydon swapped for the area. I'm told this was a SEO tactic circa 2001. Obviously this is an issue. So the question - should I 301 redirect each of the links to the Croydon page? Or (what I believe to be the best answer) set a rel=canonical tag on the duplicate pages). Creating "real and meaningful content" on each page isn't quite an option, sorry!
On-Page Optimization | | JamesFx0 -
Which Canonical URL Tag tag should we remove?
Hi guys, We are in the process of optimizing the pages of our new site. We have used the 'on page' report card feature in the Seomoz Pro Campaign analyser. On several pages we got the following result No More Than One Canonical URL Tag Number of Canonical tags <dl> <dd>2</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>The canonical URL tag is meant to be employed only a single time on an individual URL (much like the title element or meta description). To ensure the search engines properly parse the canonical source, employ only a single version of this tag.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>Remove all but a single canonical URL tag</dd> </dl> I have looked into the source code of one of the pages http://www.sabaileela.co.uk/acupuncture-london and can see that there are two "canonical" tags. Does anyone have any advise on which one I should ask the developer to remove? I am not sure how to determine the relative importance of either link.
On-Page Optimization | | brian.james0 -
Correct use of Canonical link vs 301 redirect
Hi All, Seeking yet more advice. SEOMOZ tools have told me I have duplicate content on one of my sites and I am keen to clean this up. I am not to familiar with the following so thought I would ask. The duplicate content is shown on : www.mysite.com www.mysite.com/index.html Obviously I only see index.html when I check the code so what is the best method of resolving the duplicate content, Canonical or 301? Can you give me an example 🙂 Thanks all
On-Page Optimization | | wedmonds0