Real impact of canonical links?
-
I am responsible for 2 e-commerce websites.
SEO Moz and Google Web Master tools both inform me regularly that on both sites there are many instances of duplicate titles, headings, decriptions and page content. Obviously from an SEO point of view I am more than a little concerned about this!
Out product pages struggle to perform strongly despite the fact that our website is of a decent quality and we are leaders in our field. Our competitors rank above us when they add a product page, whereas we normal flit in between 8-10 or on the 2nd SERP.
I know it is hard without viewing the site, but is duplicate content likely to be a strong, leading factor in this?
I think it is, but want to put together a business case to spend the cash to sort it out....just need someone confirmation that this is worth sorting as a priority.
Here are 2 examples of what I mean:
1) Category pages
www.exampledomain.co.uk/category1.aspx
We have filters on our category page (so the customer can sort products based on their price, colour, size etc.). When filters are used a new URL is generared.
- www.exampledomain.co.uk/category1.aspx?prices=0||10
- www.exampledomain.co.uk/category1.aspx?prices=10||20
The content, titles, description is the same although the links are different.
Do I need to set up a canonical tag on the page that reads:
2) Product pages
Product pages on the websites have different URLs depending on how to arrive on them.
You get 1 URL if you navigated to the page via the website navigation, but you get another different URL if you used the website search functionality to find the page.
Example:
Search link: www.exampledomain.co.uk/category1/Product1.aspx
Navigation link: www.exampledomain.co.uk/12345/category1/Product1.aspx
Again, do I need to set up a canonical tag for 1 of these link types so that the link benefit is not shared over 2 pages?
Any feedback would be welcome! At the moment the ability to add canonical tags is locked down by our CMS (I know, rubbish!)...so website development would be needed - hence the need for a business case!
-
Great points Dr Pete.
-
Especially post-Panda, duplicates can create a real mess. At best, it's a matter of dilution. The more pages in you have in Google's index that are "thin", the more thinly your internal link-juice (authority, basically) is spread. So, each page just gets less of it. In extreme cases, though, the entire site can suffer.
Canonicalization is tricky, and it's tough to be 100% sure from sample URLs, but my gut reacionts:
(1) Yes, I think you could safely use rel=canonical here. It's slightly odd, since these search pages are actually showing different lists of products, but your only real choices are rel=canonical or blocking the "prices=" parameter in Google Webmaster Tools. You could NOINDEX anything with "prices=" in it as well. I think canonical will work, though.
(2) This is definitely a case where you should use rel=canonical. There are true duplicates. Actually, the best case here is not to create these URLs, but I realize that's not always an option.
You could use GWT for #1, if development is an issue, but to solve (2) you're going to need some kind of page-level directive (like rel=canonical). There's no good way to get around the coding.
It's hard to gauge the impact, but I've definitely seen cases where the consequences of large scale duplicates were severe, and where large ranking/traffic improvements (as much as 3X, although it's not usually that dramatic) have occurred when the problem was fixed. To be aware that it's not instantaneous. It can take a few weeks to really see the impact.
-
Thanks for your feedback Nakul - glad I'm on the right track. The world of canonical links can certainly strain the old brain cells!
Don't suppose you have any other tips on how I can boost my product pages or any other things I should watch out for when employing canonical links across the entire site?
-
Yes, you are 100% on the right track. You do need the canonical tags in place ASAP. Both on the category and the product level.
And yes, duplicate content is also a very important consideration, so I would definitely suggest creating a business case to get unique copy done for each of your pages.
Both of these points are high priority and I am sure that's why you posted the question...to confirm. You are right.
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
-
Change Google's version of Canonical link
Hi My website has millions of URLs and some of the URLs have duplicate versions. We did not set canonical all these years. Now we wanted to implement it and fix all the technical SEO issues. I wanted to consolidate and redirect all the variations of a URL to the highest pageview version and use that as the canonical because all of these variations have the same content. While doing this, I found in Google search console that Google has already selected another variation of URL as canonical and not the highest pageview version. My questions: I have millions of URLs for which I have to do 301 and set canonical. How can I find all the canonical URLs that Google has autoselected? Search Console has a daily quota of 100 or something. Is it possible to override Google's version of Canonical? Meaning, if I set a variation as Canonical and it is different than what Google has already selected, will it change overtime in Search Console? Should I just do a 301 to highest pageview variation of the URL and not set canonicals at all? This way the canonical that Google auto selected might get redirected to the highest pageview variation of the URL. Any advice or help would be greatly appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SDCMarketing0 -
Internal links from homepage and other pages
Hello, I'm curious what the difference is between internal links from the homepage and category pages. Make it sense to give some internal links from category pages (with a high PA) to an another page for a boost in the search results? Or is the link value too low in this case? Thanks in advance,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MarcelMoz
Marcel1 -
SEO Impact of External links in JS tag
We have our JS tag and iframe tag being used over by 100 leading websites. What would be the SEO impact if we added a follow link in the iframe. Would it have any negative impact ? Vivek
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kvivek050 -
Using Canonical Attribute
Hi All, I am hoping you can help me? We have recently migrated to the Umbraco CMS and now have duplicate versions of the same page showing on different URLs. My understanding is that this is one of the major reasons for the rel=canonical tag. So am I right in saying that if I add the following to the page that I want to rank then this will work? I'm just a little worried as I have read some horror stories of people implementing this attribute incorrectly and getting into trouble. Thank you in advance
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Creditsafe0 -
For those of you that used LINK DETOX.
Did you go ahead and remove all the TOXIC and HIGH RISK links? Just the toxic? Were you successful with the tool?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | netviper0 -
Backlinking from a Canonical Page to the Non-Canonical Doman - Wrong Signals?
Hi Mozzers, Let's say you have www.mysite.com/page, which is a duplicate of www.yoursite.com/page. www.yousite.com/page has a rel canonical link identifying www.mysite.com/page as the original source. www.mysite.com/page has a followed backlink going towards www.yousite.com/home-page. mysite.com has a DA of 44
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Travis-W
yoursite.com has a DA of 33 Google has chosen to index www.yoursite.com/page instead of www.mysite.com/page. Is the followed backlink responsible for the wrong page being indexed? Thanks!0 -
Can links indexed by google "link:" be bad? or this is like a good example by google
Can links indexed by google "link:" be bad? Or this is like a good example shown by google. We are cleaning our links from Penguin and dont know what to do with these ones. Some of them does not look quality.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bele0 -
Excessive navigation links
I'm working on the code for a collaborative project that will eventually have hundreds of pages. The editor of this project wants all pages to be listed in the main navigation at the top of the site. There are four main dropdown (suckerfish-style) menus and these have nested sub- and sub-sub-menus. Putting aside the UI issues this creates, I'm concerned about how Google will find our content on the page. Right now, we now have over 120 links above the main content of the page and have plans to add more as time goes on (as new pages are created). Perhaps of note, these navigation elements are within an html5 <nav>element: <nav id="access" role="navigation"> Do you think that Google is savvy enough to overlook the "abundant" navigation links and focus on the content of the page below? Will the <nav>element help us get away with this navigation strategy? Or should I reel some of these navigation pages into categories? As you might surmise the site has a fairly flat structure, hence the lack of category pages.</nav> </nav> </nav>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | boxcarpress1