Home Page Canonical Question
-
I have an online store through hosting service Volusion. I have asked them about this and was told that this is normal. I would like to confirm this with you guys because I'm not convinced of the quality of their customer service and I'm not an expert.
When I check Analytics the landing page that is visited most often is www....../default.asp and the second most visited is www........./ . These are, of course, both my home page. Volusion has radio button that allows the admin to "enable canonical links", which I have enabled, and they told me that it is normal to see this on google analytics regardless.
When I type in either of those addreses, the homepage comes up as the address that I typed. In other words it doesn't redirect so that it is always the same.
Am I right to be concerned about this?
-
The 301 Redirect in Volusion only works if the page does not exist. Since /default.asp does exist it doesn't redirect. Not sure what to do.
-
To the home page, you must choose a version and make the 301 redirect for just one option. Using canonical, the home relevance is dividing between several pages, even if google knows what the original content. To concentrate the whole relevance of the home, 301 is the best option.
-
Volusion does have the ability to do 301 redirects, so you can set that up to redirect the /default.asp to the / page. I have no experience with Volusion myself, but the following link (and a search on their site for redirects) should get you off on the right foot.
http://support.volusion.com/article/301-redirects
The 301 redirects won't affect your previous GA history, but it will help keep it straight from now on.
Do you have unique page titles for each page? If you can look at landing page by page title that may also help you work around this in an historical sense.
-
Thank you very much, that makes sense now.
-
Let me give you an example:
If there are say 3 copies of your webpage
www.domain.com; www.domain.com/index.php; www.domain.com/home.html
Ideally, you would want everyone to land on the 1st option, so here is what you could do.
Activate canonical for the url #2 and #3, in the rel=canonical tag specify the complete URL for the #1 option. That way, even if Google crawls the #2 and #3 URL, it will know that the URL that should be considered is the #1 URL.
rel=canonical does not redirect the page unlike a 302 or 301 redirection where the page is redirected to the URL you want.
-
Thank you for the quick response. I guess what I'm still not understanding is:
You said, "If you have enabled canonical tag on your URL to redirect the shadow copies of your webpage to 1 location, it should be fine." I am wondering- if the "enable canonical links" feature on my site is working then should I be able to type in www......./ and see www......../ and type in www.......default.asp and see www......default.asp . Shouldn't one of those be redirected so that both show the same address like www...../ for example?
-
If you have enabled canonical tag on your URL to redirect the shadow copies of your webpage to 1 location, it should be fine. In the long run however, you should think about getting a 301 redirect to your homepage URL for the URLs that are shadow copies.
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
-
Should search pages be indexed?
Hey guys, I've always believed that search pages should be no-indexed but now I'm wondering if there is an argument to index them? Appreciate any thoughts!
Technical SEO | | RebekahVP0 -
Site Crawl -> Duplicate Page Content -> Same pages showing up with duplicates that are not
These, for example: | https://im.tapclicks.com/signup.php/?utm_campaign=july15&utm_medium=organic&utm_source=blog | 1 | 2 | 29 | 2 | 200 |
Technical SEO | | writezach
| https://im.tapclicks.com/signup.php?_ga=1.145821812.1573134750.1440742418 | 1 | 1 | 25 | 2 | 200 |
| https://im.tapclicks.com/signup.php?utm_source=tapclicks&utm_medium=blog&utm_campaign=brightpod-article | 1 | 119 | 40 | 4 | 200 |
| https://im.tapclicks.com/signup.php?utm_source=tapclicks&utm_medium=marketplace&utm_campaign=homepage | 1 | 119 | 40 | 4 | 200 |
| https://im.tapclicks.com/signup.php?utm_source=blog&utm_campaign=first-3-must-watch-videos | 1 | 119 | 40 | 4 | 200 |
| https://im.tapclicks.com/signup.php?_ga=1.159789566.2132270851.1418408142 | 1 | 5 | 31 | 2 | 200 |
| https://im.tapclicks.com/signup.php/?utm_source=vocus&utm_medium=PR&utm_campaign=52release | Any suggestions/directions for fixing or should I just disregard this "High Priority" moz issue? Thank you!0 -
Redesigned and Migrated Website - Lost Almost All Organic Traffic - Mobile Pages Indexing over Normal Pages
We recently redesigned and migrated our site from www.jmacsupply.com to https://www.jmac.com It has been over 2 weeks since implementing 301 redirects, and we have lost over 90% of our organic traffic. Google seems to be indexing the mobile versions of our pages over our website pages. We hired a designer to redesign the site, and we are confident the code is doing something that is harmful for ranking our website. F or Example: If you google "KEEDEX-K-DS-FLX38" You should see our mobile page ranking: http://www.jmac.com/mobile/Product.aspx?ProductCode=KEEDEX-K-DS-FLX38 but the page that we want ranked (and we think should be, is https://www.jmac.com/Keedex_K_DS_FLX38_p/keedex-k-ds-flx38.htm) That second page isn't even indexed. (When you search for: "site:jmac.com Keedex K-DS-FLX38") We have implemented rel canonical, and rel alternate both ways. What are we doing wrong??? Thank you in advance for any help - it is much appreciated.
Technical SEO | | jmaccom0 -
3,511 Pages Indexed and 3,331 Pages Blocked by Robots
Morning, So I checked our site's index status on WMT, and I'm being told that Google is indexing 3,511 pages and the robots are blocking 3,331. This seems slightly odd as we're only disallowing 24 pages on the robots.txt file. In light of this, I have the following queries: Do these figures mean that Google is indexing 3,511 pages and blocking 3,331 other pages? Or does it mean that it's blocking 3,331 pages of the 3,511 indexed? As there are only 24 URLs being disallowed on robots.text, why are 3,331 pages being blocked? Will these be variations of the URLs we've submitted? Currently, we don't have a sitemap. I know, I know, it's pretty unforgivable but the old one didn't really work and the developers are working on the new one. Once submitted, will this help? I think I know the answer to this, but is there any way to ascertain which pages are being blocked? Thanks in advance! Lewis
Technical SEO | | PeaSoupDigital0 -
Schema Address Question
I have a local business with a contact page that I want to add schema markup to. However, I was wondering if having the address with schema info on the contact page instead of the home page has any adverse effects on the rich snippet showing up in search. There's no logical place to add schema for a local business on the home page, so having it on the contact page—not in the footer or sidebar—is the only option.
Technical SEO | | DLaw0 -
Indexed pages and current pages - Big difference?
Our website shows ~22k pages in the sitemap but ~56k are showing indexed on Google through the "site:" command. Firstly, how much attention should we paying to the discrepancy? If we should be worried what's the best way to find the cause of the difference? The domain canonical is set so can't really figure out if we've got a problem or not?
Technical SEO | | Nathan.Smith0 -
Should I delete a page or remove links on a penalized page?
Hello All, If I have a internal page that has low quality links point to it or a penality. Can I just remove the page, and start over versus trying to remove the links? Over time wouldn't this page disapear along with the penalty on that page? Kinda like pruning a tree? Cutting off the junk limbs so other could grow stronger, or to start new fresh ones. Example: www.domain.com Penalized Internal Page: (Say this page is penalized due to keyword stuffing, and has low quality links pointing to it like blog comments, or profiles) www.domain.com/penalized-internal-page.com Would it be effective to just delete this page (www.domain.com/penalized-internal-page.com) and start over with a new page. New Internal Page: www.domain.com/new-internal-page.com I would of course lose any good links point to that page, but it might be easier then trying to remove old back links. Thoughts? Thanks! Pete
Technical SEO | | Juratovic0 -
301 lots of old pages to home page
Will it hurt me if i redirect a few hundred old pages to my home page? I currently have a mess on my hands with many 404's showing up after moving my site to a new ecommerce server. We have been at the new server for 2 years but still have 337 404s showing up in google webmaster tools. I don't think it would affect users as very few people woudl find those old links but I don't want to mess with google. Also, how much are those 404s hurting my rank?
Technical SEO | | bhsiao1