Regarding Rel Canonical on PhoneTech.dk
-
Hi All you Seo Experts from seomoz
I have a question about one of my webshops where I have the same product listed in different categories where I on the duplicate pages use the Rel Caninical Tag on, that points to the main product url. I just have to verify with you guys that I did it correctly
Example on the shop. This is just an example
www.phonetech.dk/shop/product1.html - This is Main
Duplicates
www.phonetech.dk/shop/iphone3G/product1.html - Canonical Tag on this one pointing to the main.
www.phonetech.dk/shop/iphone3g/backcovers/product1.html - Canonical Tag on this one pointing to the main.
www.phonetech.dk/shop/iphone3gs/colorbackcovers/product1.html - Canonical Tag here also pointing to main
Hope you guys can help me that my use of Canonical Tag is correct.
Regards
Christian - Denmark
-
Are these pages identical, but just reached via different paths (based on category/sub-category navigation)? If so, the canonical tag is definitely a good choice here. Ideally, it's best not to create duplicate paths, as it can cause long-term problems, but in lieu of that, canonical is probably your best defense.
-
It was just an example, its now live url's
-
It's fine to not include the canonical on the main/target page. As @donford said, it's fine to have a self-reference canonical, but it's definitely not necessary.
-
Are these live pages, or did something page (I can't seem to access them). Looking at the URLs, it seems like these are slightly different products, so I'm not clear if the canonical tag is appropriate.
-
Rel canonical tags should be on the pages that they are dealing with.
In my example above a rel canonical tag would be fine all the pages
awebsite.com/t-shirts/product_id=14
awebsite.com/t-shirts/product_id=14?color=Red
awebsite.com/t-shirts/product_id=14?color=Red&Size=L
awebsite.com/t-shirts/product_id=14?color=Red&Size=L&Gender=FOn each of the pages the tag would be
href="http://www.awebsite.com/t-shirts/product_id=14"/>You would not put it on the page
awebsite.com/t-shirts/ or awebsite.com
Hope that clarifies it for you.
-
Ok but its ok if it not included on the main page?
-
It doesn't need to be, but given the way the tag works, it does not hurt if the page you're on, is the path of the rel canonical.
Since the tag deals with dynamic pages it is very normal for the root page to have the tag as well as the dynamic pages.
-
Ok, but the canonical tag shall not be on the main right?
-
Hi Christian that is basically what the REL canonical is for, typically it is used to deal with dynamic urls like
awebsite.com/t-shirts/product_id=14
awebsite.com/t-shirts/product_id=14?color=Red
awebsite.com/t-shirts/product_id=14?color=Red&Size=L
awebsite.com/t-shirts/product_id=14?color=Red&Size=L&Gender=FI have seen some ecommerce shops that allow you to copy products from one category to another, if you do this, then yes REL canonical is how I would deal with this myself.
Hope it helps,
Don
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
-
Shopify Canonicals for Tagged Filters
I've been researching this topic endlessly and thought I had arrived at a solution but Screaming Frog indicates my solution was not successful. Problem: I used tags to filter my collections pages. The result, I discovered, was the creation of dozens and dozens, maybe hundreds, of additional collection URLs for each possible permutation of tag filters. I would like to make the collection page URL, with no tag filters, the canonical. Proposed Solution: I found the following code described somewhere as the solution: {% if template contains 'collection' and current_tags %} {% else %} {% endif %} However, I crawled my site with Screaming Frog and found that the canonical link element is still listed as the URL with the tags included. The crawler does recognizes the "noindex" instruction. Any ideas on what the best move is here?
Technical SEO | | vgusvg0 -
Rel canonical between mirrored domains
Hi all & happy new near! I'm new to SEO and could do with a spot of advice: I have a site that has several domains that mirror it (not good, I know...) So www.site.com, www.site.edu.sg, www.othersite.com all serve up the same content. I was planning to use rel="canonical" to avoid the duplication but I have a concern: Currently several of these mirrors rank - one, the .com ranks #1 on local google search for some useful keywords. the .edu.sg also shows up as #9 for a dirrerent page. In some cases I have multiple mirrors showing up on a specific serp. I would LIKE to rel canonical everything to the local edu.sg domain since this is most representative of the fact that the site is for a school in Singapore but...
Technical SEO | | AlexSG
-The .com is listed in DMOZ (this used to be important) and none of the volunteers there ever respoded to requests to update it to the .edu.sg
-The .com ranks higher than the com.sg page for non-local search so I am guessing google has some kind of algorithm to mark down obviosly local domains in other geographic locations Any opinions on this? Should I rel canonical the .com to the .edu.sg or vice versa? I appreciate any advice or opinion before I pull the trigger and end up shooting myself in the foot! Best regards from Singapore!0 -
ECommerce Problem with canonicol , rel next , rel prev
Hi I was wondering if anyone willing to share your experience on implementing pagination and canonical when it comes to multiple sort options . Lets look at an example I have a site example.com ( i share the ownership with the rest of the world on that one 😉 ) and I sell stuff on the site example.com/for-sale/stuff1 example.com/for-sale/stuff2 example.com/for-sale/stuff3 etc I allow users to sort it by date_added, price, a-z, z-a, umph-value, and so on . So now we have example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=date_added example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=price example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=a-z example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=z-a example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=umph-value etc example.com/for-sale/stuff1 **has the same result as **example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=date_added ( that is the default sort option ) similarly for stuff2, stuff3 and so on. I cant 301 these because these are relevant for users who come in to buy from the site. I can add a view all page and rel canonical to that but let us assume its not technically possible for the site and there are tens of thousands of items in each of the for-sale pages. So I split it up in to pages of x numbers and let us assume we have 50 pages to sort through. example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=date_added&page=2 to ...page=50 example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=price&page=2 to ...page=50 example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=a-z&page=2 to ...page=50 example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=z-a&page=2 to ...page=50 example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=umph-value&page=2 to ...page=50 etc This is where the shit hits the fan. So now if I want to avoid duplicate issue and when it comes to page 30 of stuff1 sorted by date do I add rel canonical = example.com/for-sale/stuff1 rel next = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=date_added&page=31 rel prev = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=date_added&page=29 or rel canonical = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=date_added rel next = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=date_added&page=31 rel prev = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=date_added&page=29 or rel canonical = example.com/for-sale/stuff1 rel next = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?page=31 rel prev = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?page=29 or rel canonical = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?page=30 rel next = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=date_added&page=31 rel prev = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=date_added&page=29 or rel canonical = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?page=30 rel next = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?page=31 rel prev = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?page=29 None of this feels right to me . I am thinking of using GWT to ask G-bot not to crawl any of the sort parameters ( date_added, price, a-z, z-a, umph-value, and so on ) and use rel canonical = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=date_added&page=30 rel next = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=date_added&page=31 rel prev = example.com/for-sale/stuff1?sortby=date_added&page=29 My doubts about this is that , will the link value that goes in to the pages with parameters be consolidated when I choose to ignore them via URL Parameters in GWT ? what do you guys think ?
Technical SEO | | Saijo.George0 -
Canonical warnings
[1] My site development tool (XSP) has recently added the canonical reference as an auto-generated tag, so every page of my site now has it. Why is SEOmoz warning me that I have hundreds of pages of canonicals if it's supposed to be a GOOD thing? [2] Google is still seeing the pages without the canonical tag because that's how they were indexed. Will they eventually get purged from their index, or should I be proactive about that, and if so, how? Thanks for any input.
Technical SEO | | PatioLifeStyle0 -
Canonical Question
Our site has thousands of items, however using the old "Widgets" analogy we are unsure on how to implement the canonical tag, and if we need to at all. At the moment our main product pages lists all different "widget" products on one page, however the user can visit other sub pages that filter out the different versions of the product. I.e. glass widgets (20 products)
Technical SEO | | Corpsemerch
glass blue widgets (15 products)
glass red widgets (5 products)
etc.... I.e. plastic widgets (70 products)
plastic blue widgets (50 products)
plastic red widgets (20 products)
etc.... As the sub pages are repeating products from the main widgets page we added the canonical tag on the sub pages to refer to the main widget page. The thinking is that Google wont hit us with a penalty for duplicate content. As such the subpages shouldnt rank very well but the main page should gather any link juice from these subpages? Typically once we added the canonical tag it was coming up to the penguin update, lost a 20%-30% of our traffic and its difficult not to think it was the canonical tag dropping our subpages from the serps. Im tempted to remove the tag and return to how the site used to be repeating products on subpages.. not in a seo way but to help visitors drill down to what they want quickly. Any comments would be welcome..0 -
On page audit throws a rel="canonical" curve ball :-(
Good Morning from -3 Degrees C, still no paths gritted wetherby UK 😞 Following an on page audit one recommendation instructs me to ad:
Technical SEO | | Nightwing
http://www.barrettsteel.com/" /> on the home page of barrett steel. I'm confused, i thought i only had to add this to duplications
the home page which to my knowledge dont exist. So my question is please: "Why shoul i ad this snippet of code on the home page of http://www.barrettsteel.com http://www.barrettsteel.com/" /> Any insights welcome 🙂0 -
Canonical URLs and screen scraping
So a little question here. I was looking into a module to help implement canonical URLs on a certain CMS and I came a cross a snarky comment about relative vs. absolute URLs being used. This person was insistent that relative URLs are fine and absolute URLs are only for people who don't know what they are doing. My question is, if using relative URLs, doesn't it make it easier to have your content scraped? After all, if you do get your content scraped at least it would point back to your site if using absolute URLs, right? Am I missing something or is my thinking OK on this? Any feedback is much appreciated!
Technical SEO | | friendlymachine0 -
Canonical Link for Duplicate Content
A client of ours uses some unique keyword tracking for their landing pages where they append certain metrics in a query string, and pulls that information out dynamically to learn more about their traffic (kind of like Google's UTM tracking). Non-the-less these query strings are now being indexed as separate pages in Google and Yahoo and are being flagged as duplicate content/title tags by the SEOmoz tools. For example: Base Page: www.domain.com/page.html
Technical SEO | | kchandler
Tracking: www.domain.com/page.html?keyword=keyword#source=source Now both of these are being indexed even though it is only one page. So i suggested placing an canonical link tag in the header point back to the base page to start discrediting the tracking URLs: But this means that the base pages will be pointing to themselves as well, would that be an issue? Is their a better way to solve this issue without removing the query tracking all togther? Thanks - Kyle Chandler0