Are my canonical re directs working?
-
Buonjourno from Wetherby UK
Ive been battlling sometime to get this site http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk to rank for term Right To Manage. Amongst other tactics ive set up a canonical
- http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk/about/right-to-manage.aspx * - Canonical version
http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk/how-we-care-for-you/right-to-manage.aspx
http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk/what-our-customers-say/right-to-manage.aspx
http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk/ -
But has this canonical redirect feature worked? The reason i doubt it is i notice when i enter a page http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk/what-our-customers-say/right-to-manage.aspx which has the below code in place:
rell="canonical" href="http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk/About/right-to-manage.aspx/" />
It does not jump to  http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk/about/right-to-manage.aspx
So my question is...
"is the canonical redirect working or not & waht is the best way / tool for diagnosing a canonical error"
Grazie tanto,
David -
You're welcome David
Hope some of that helped.
Andy
-
Hi Andy,
thank you fir taking time out to look at this again Ive 301 redirect the rogue urls and the souble ll in rel was a typo i passed into my post & mercifully wasnt on the live site.
Thanks again,
David
-
If you pulled that code off your page, you have spelt 'rel' wrong.
But as I already said, rel canonical is not a redirect - a 301 is a redirect. Rel canonical is a suggestion to Google with a preferred page meant for those times when - but if they look at what you are doing, you have very little chance of that working as it stands.
Are you not able to re-write the duplicate content or remove it altogether? Perhaps even think about no-indexing those pages.
Andy
-
Hi Andy,
Yes i know its duplicate conent thats why i added the canonical re directs.
So my question is...
"is the canonical redirect working or not & waht is the best way / tool for diagnosing a canonical error"
Thanks,
David
-
Hi Andy,
Yes i know its duplicate conent thats why i added the canonical re directs.
So my question is...
"is the canonical redirect working or not & waht is the best way / tool for diagnosing a canonical error"
Thanks,
David
-
Just to ad ive just decided to ad 301 redirects to bury this problem hopefully permanently
-
A rel=canonical is only a suggestion to Google for which page is the preferred one to deliver the content, so there is never any guarantee that they will deliver content.
However, what I see are 3 pages of identical content - you shouldn't be too surprised to hear that this is duplication and as such, very unlikely that Google is going to rank those pages at all.
I would consider a change of tact that includes removing the duplicate content.
Andy
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
-
Question re: spammy internal links on site
Hi all, I have a blog (managed via WordPress) that seems to have built spammy internal links that were not created by us on our end. See "site:blog.execu-search.com" in Google search results. It seems to be a pharma-hack that's creating spammy links on our blog to random offers re: viagra, paxil, xenical, etc. When viewing "Security Issues", GSC doesn't state that the site has been infected and it seems like the site is in good health according to Google. Will anyone be able to provide any insight on the best necessary steps to take to remove these links and to run a check on my blog to see if it is in fact infected?  Should all spammy internal links by disavowed? Here are a couple of my findings: When looking at "internal links" in GSC, I see a few mentions of these spammy links. When running a site crawl in Moz, I don't see any mention of these spammy links. The spammy links are leading to a 404 page.  However, it appears some of the cached version in Google are still displaying the page. Please lmk. Any insight would be much appreciated. Thanks all! Best,
Technical SEO | | hdeg
Sung0 -
How do I direct users to site page when they search vanity URL?
My company runs a contest via a landing page on our website. The full URL to the landing page is rather long so we have a vanity URL that we use for advertising purposes. I have a 301 on the vanity URL to the landing page URL so people visiting it directly end up where they should just fine. But if a user goes to Google and types the vanity URL into the search bar, the landing page is nowhere to be found in the results. What do I need to do to get the landing page to show in results when people search the vanity URL?
Technical SEO | | jarjarjarvis0 -
Sitelink demotion not working after submitting in Google webmaster tool
Hello Friends, I have a question regarding demotion of sitelinks in Google webmaster tool. Scenario: I have demoted one of the sitelink for my website two months back; still the demoted sitelink has not been removed from the Google search results.May I know any reason, why this page is not getting removed even after demoting from GWT? If we resubmit the same link in demotion tool one more time, will it work? Can anybody help me out with this? Note: Since the validly of demotion exists only for 3 months (90 days), I am concerned about the same.
Technical SEO | | zco_seo0 -
Rel=canonical - Identical .com and .us Version of Site
We have a .us and a .com version of our site that we direct customers to based on location to servers. This is not changing for the foreseeable future. We had restricted Google from crawling the .us version of the site and all was fine until I started to see the https version of the .us appearing in the SERPs for certain keywords we keep an eye on. The .com still exists and is sometimes directly above or under the .us. It is occasionally a different page on the site with similar content to the query, or sometimes it just returns the exact same page for both the .com and the .us results. This has me worried about duplicate content issues. The question(s): Should I just get the https version of the .us to not be crawled/indexed and leave it at that or should I work to get a rel=canonical set up for the entire .us to .com (making the .com the canonical version)? Are there any major pitfalls I should be aware of in regards to the rel=canonical across the entire domain (both the .us and .com are identical and these newly crawled/indexed .us pages rank pretty nicely sometimes)? Am I better off just correcting it so the .us is no longer crawled and indexed and leaving it at that? Side question: Have any ecommerce guys noticed that Googlebot has started to crawl/index and serve up https version of your URLs in the SERPs even if the only way to get into those versions of the pages are to either append the https:// yourself to the URL or to go through a sign in or check out page? Is Google, in the wake of their https everywhere and potentially making it a ranking signal, forcing the check for the https of any given URL and choosing to index that? I just can't figure out how it is even finding those URLs to index if it isn't seeing http://www.example.com and then adding the https:// itself and checking... Help/insight on either point would be appreciated.
Technical SEO | | TLM0 -
Using canonical for duplicate contents outside of my domain
I have 2 domains for the same company, Â example.com and example.sg Sometimes we have to post the same content or event on both websites so to protect my website from duplicate content plenty i use canonical tag to point to either .com or .sg depend on the page. Any idea if this is the right decision Thanks
Technical SEO | | MohammadSabbagh0 -
When choosing GWT preferred domain its asking for re-verification?
Trying to set a preferred domain in GWT, and the site is verified via Google Analytics and meta tag in the code, but still asks: Part of the process of setting a preferred domain is to verify that you own http://site.org/. Please verify http://site.org/. Tried looking for answer to no avail, am I missing anything?
Technical SEO | | vmialik0 -
404 not working?
Apologies - not strictly a search question, although I am concerned that it may be negatively impacting my sites. If I enter an invalid URL - the "page not found 404 error" doesn't seem to be working. I can enter http://www.%sitename%/index.php/randomnamemadeup/ and it displays the homepage (albeit with a broken CSS). I can't fathom it out - any help appreciated. Thanks, David
Technical SEO | | newstd1000 -
How similar do pages need to be in order to utilize the canonical tag
Here is my specific situation. My company released new versions of a few documents in the fall. I was hoping that over time the old version would decline and the new version would rise but after 6 months the old version continues to rank #1 and the new version #3. The old version needs to stay on our site but users should really be getting to the most recent version. I think utilizing the canonical tag would solve the issue but i am concerned because the content on the actual pages is not duplicate but it is updated. Below are the two URLs to see the differences in the content. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/reports/06tr008.cfm http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/reports/10tr033.cfm Is this an appropriate situation to use the canonical tag? If not, is there a better solution.
Technical SEO | | SEI0