Canonicalization - Some advice needed :)
-
Hi guys,
To be honest, it's a little bit embarrassing to throw out this question but it's one of the weakest points of knowledge at the moment for me.
I've tried to get a grasp of canonical URLs and what it all means. From my understanding, it's informing Google which page to take into consideration when there's the possibility for duplicate content. Right?
However, with the site I'm working on I'm not sure if it would be worth putting site-wide and the impact it would have.
Site I'm working on - http://bit.ly/N7eew7
With the nature of the site, there would be a lot of duplicated content as there's the possibility that several properties listed could have a similar address due to being in the same building etc.
From what I can see, no canonical URL was setup on the homepage.
The other variations of the homepage URL are 301 redirecting to thee http:/www. version.
Can someone explain it all to me in simple terms? Honestly believe that I'm getting more confused by the minute.
Thanks guys for your patience
-
Seems like Matt and Marcus have you on the right track. With a real-estate site, duplicates and near-duplicates are very common, since you're adding and removing properties all the time and there are many search options and categories. I do agree that search-friendly URLs, long-term, where each property has a fixed URL, are definitely the best bet. In the meantime, though, a solid canonical structure helps a lot.
Ease into it - don't go sitewide in one fell swoop without a plan, unless you're having clear ranking problems. Start with your biggest problem areas, monitor/measure, and work from there. You can always check for indexed duplicates by running a Google search like:
site:daft.ie intitle:"176 Rathgar Road"
In this case, I'm not seeing any index issues, although I think Matt's concerns are valid.
I'd also consider rel=prev/next for search results pages, as that can help focus Google, too. Again, take it one step at a time and start with the biggest problems. It'll mitigate your risk all around.
-
What's everyones opinion canonicali URL being setup site-wide?
-
Hey, as per the email, it is exactly as above.
We can check the two versions of the URLs.
Confirm they both have the same canonical URL
then check both URLs using the info:URL command in Google to verify that in both instances, with and without final slash, the URL returned as indexed includes the final slash as per the canonical.
Any problems, give me a shout!
Marcus -
Hi Marcus thanks for your help so far. I've emailed you my URL's for a better look at the issue I'm facing.
-
Hi Antonio,
I hope you're well and not pulling your hair out in frustration just yet.
There are a few factors that you need to consider before making a decision on this:
1. Would changing the URL of the post give more traffic through the search engine than you are currently getting?
2. How would this impact the existing links that have been built to the original URL.
Remember that if you are going to change the URL of a page, this will just look like a new webpage to Google. All of the Facebook likes, Google+ +1's, links, etc will be going to the previous URL. Not only that, if you do a 301 redirect to the new URL, you will only transfer some of the link juice that you have made.
URL changes really should be a last resort and need to be thought out properly at the start of the webpage creation. In the case of Mark (above), I have recommended that he change the URLs because they are all dynamic and the benefit of changing these pages vs not, wins.
Let me know the URL of the page in question and I will take a look and tell you what I think.
Matt.
-
Hello Mathew and Mark congrats for the great support and highlights.
In the light of what you are explaning here could you please supoport me in this question concerning Canonical or 301 redirect? My issue is in terms of SEO when doing canolical.
I have a page with a long post title and url path name (more than 70 caracters and 115). This page has many visits but I am changing the SEO website structure according to SEOMOz and forums guidelines for the length names so: I WILL CREATE A DUPLICATE PAGE WITH THE SAME INFO.
This issue has been marked as an issue in the SEO tools, for long names>70 and url path names>115
My question is which option should I use and you would recommend me?
1. OPTION 1: Ideally I would like to keep the old post, so I should use the canonical tag, but my main concern is if the search engines in terms of SEO, even the canonical has been done, will penalise my SEO as there is still a post with bad SEO optimising, or if this is not the case because I already used the canonical. The duplicate content would still exist!
2. OPTION 2: Eliminate the post and redirection 301 to the new page to keep the juice.
I would prefer option 1, as I keep both post and page, but only if searchengines do not penalise my SEO as they detect a long post name and url path name.
Thank you very much for the help,
Antonio
-
Hi Matthew,
Thanks very much for your explanation. I think I get to understand it better now
Many thanks,
Christian
-
Will do - cheers Matthew
I'll probably take you up on that offer.
-
No problem.
I think the URLs should be the primary focus, and if you need any help on this, feel free to drop me a private message, etc and I will help you out.
Matt.
-
Hi Matthew, thanks for chipping in.
At the moment we do have canonical URLs setup for property listings such as the example you given above.
We'll still be going ahead with cleaning up the URL structure and ensuring categories following the correct practice as well.
-
Hi Christian,
No, this wouldn't be the case because what you are telling Google there is that "http://www.example.co.uk/properties/search" is the EXACT SAME page as the "/properties/search?page=1&commercialListingType=lease&propertyType=commercial/properties/search?page=1&commercialListingType=buy&propertyType=retail/" page.
For the likes of just search pages, you don't need to have canonical URLs because they are just dynamically generated search pages. Where you DO NEED canonical URLs is on the likes of category pages, product pages, etc.
So, in the case of Mark's website, the individual property listing pages (e.g, http://www.daft.ie/searchshortterm.daft?id=23606) need to have a canonical link because you could get to this page that has the EXACT SAME content with a similar URL (i don't know another URL to give the example here but a made up example could be http://www.daft.ie/searchshortterm.daft?id=23606keyword=dublin).
This is why you should have search engine friendly URLs to make it easy to understand which page is which. So having http://www.daft.ie/short-term/dublin/176-rathgar-road-apartment/ as the URL instead of http://www.daft.ie/searchshortterm.daft?id=23606 can make life a lot easier.
Has this helped to clear things up a bit?
Matt.
-
Hard to tell for 100% without the proper URLs but I don't think so.
You have one page that works on two different URLs. The page has a canonical tag showing that the http://www.mysite.com/product-a/ is the correct version.
So, in Googles eyes:
http://www.mysite.com/product-a/
http://www.mysite.com/product-aAre both pointing to:
http://www.mysite.com/product-a/
Due to the tag:
<link < span="">href="http://www.mysite.com/product-a/" rel="canonical" /> </link <>
There could be a bit more to this picture, if you don't want to post a link on here drop me an email to marcus@bowlerhat.co.uk and ill double check for you.
In an ideal world I would want consistency between URL's, site links and trailing slashes. I.E. If the page resolves on:
http://www.mysite.com/product-a
But is canonicalised to
http://www.mysite.com/product-a/
I would want a 301 from
http://www.mysite.com/product-a
to
http://www.mysite.com/product-a/
and all internal links to point to
http://www.mysite.com/product-a/
That's probably made it more confusing but in essence, nope, I think you are fine.
Cheers
Marcus
-
Hi Marcus
So here's what I've done...
So I've navigated like so:
Campaign>Crawl Diagnostics>Errors (68)>Duplicate Page Content Errors (61)Once this page loads all of the links, I've clicked on one of the links and it shows
1 Error
X Duplicate Page Content
Read MoreClicked on Read More then on the number 2 link that shows under the heading of Other URLs
This displays my two urls:
http://www.mysite.com/product-a/
http://www.mysite.com/product-aWhen I navigate to this page and view the source code I can see the following code:
href="http://www.mysite.com/product-a/" rel="canonical" />So I'm confused, do I have a duplicate content problem or not?
NB If I remove the trailing slash from my url it will show the same page. It does not do a redirect to the url with the slash. (I've highlighted this to Hubspot and they have said that it is not a problem?)
-
I don't believe that SEOMoz reports cover canonicalised links.
Simple test:
- Grab one page that has duplicate problems according to the report
- grab all duplicates from the spreadsheet
- Check the canonical on all
Mark - this is the same problem you will run into that I was trying to highlight above.
Marcus
-
I'm trialling seoMoz at the moment and so far I have 61 duplicate content crawl errors showing in one of my campaigns. This has sent me running to my CMS provider (Hubspot) to query this.
They've advised me that they automatically sort out canonicalisation.So I'm left in a state of not knowing where to focus.
Are Hubspot wrong or are the seoMoz reports broken?
-
Hi Christian,
That's a really good question - Can anyone shed any light on this one?
Personally I would have made the URL you mentioned be the canonical one.
But seeing I'm here asking for advice on it, maybe someone else would be better placed to help.
-
Well, you know, my dear old mother used to say an ounce of SEO prevention is worth a pound of SEO cure. Catch you later Mark.
-
Hi Mark and Marcus,
Sorry for jumping in your discussion; if i have URLs like below:
/properties/search?page=1&commercialListingType=lease&propertyType=commercial
/properties/search?page=1&commercialListingType=buy&propertyType=retail
does this mean that my canonical will be:
?
Many thanks for your help.
~Christian
-
Thanks Marcus - Agreed
Once URL structure has been improved, I will look into ensuring that specific property pages have canonical URLs and all relevant categories are appropriate setup as well.
Quite a bit of work to do but it should be worth it in the long term for the business.
-
Hi Mark,
No problem.
Yes, you are correct to assume that. For each of the property listings you would need to do this (just like the example that Marcus has given below).
I think that all areas of the website should really conform to these search engine friendly URLs. It may take quite a bit of time, but it will help you avoid a lot of issues in the future (which I can guarantee you would have).
Matt.
-
Yep, for sure, just beware it may still report duplication problems after you add the canonical URL so you will need to give it a manual once over. This is 100% worth doing though.
Marcus
-
Hi Marcus,
Just problems with the Moz tools.
We haven't been affected at all by any algorithm changes so far.
I still think it would be best to follow best practice going forward. I've just began work on this site and want to get to the root of any underlying problems.
Cheers,
Mark
-
Hey Mark
Are you having real world issues or just problems within the Moz tools?
I have feeling they don't factor canonicalisation at the moment (which sucks a bit) so you will do well to export the report to a spreadsheet and check them off manually.
Glad it was helpful!
Marcus
-
Marcus, thank you for giving such clear examples to me. It's a great help.
I'm a little bit embarrassed by the fact that it was causing such confusion up until now but it's clear to me now what needs to be changed.
With SEOMoz Campaign setup for the site, we have been receiving many duplicate content errors.
Hopefully the use of correct canonical URLs should help to eliminate many of the problems we have been having.
-
Hi Matt,
Thanks for the advice
Optimization of the URL structure is certainly something which I'm focusing on at the moment.
Taking on-board what you have mentioned, with the URL structure replaced, I presume that similar canonicals would need to be setup on each property listing to avoid duplicate content?
Do you think it's an issue which I should look into for other areas of the site as well?
Apologies for my questions. As you can guess, I'm trying to get to the root of any issues we're having with duplicate content.
Many thanks,
Mark
-
Hey Mark
In simple terms, the canonical URL exists as a suggestion to Google that a page may have various URLs or that various URLs may contain similar or near duplicate content.
For instance:
Lets say we have a list of properties in Birmingham, UK and that we have 3 pages showing that list of properties - the first by date order, the second by price high to low, the third by price low to high.
- http://www.example.co.uk/birmingham/properties.php
- http://www.example.co.uk/birmingham/properties.php?sort=hightolow
- http://www.example.co.uk/birmingham/properties.php?sort=lowtohigh
This is a perfect time to use the canonical URL as the content is the same, it is just jiggled around a little so all of these would set the default page as the canonical.
default page: http://www.example.co.uk/birmingham/properties.php
So, all pages would have this tag:
Then, Google knows that from a search and indexation perspective, they can return the one main version of this page and the others are just the same thing jumbled around a bit.
This is also a good, solid overview with a video and a basic explanation:
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=139394
Hope that helps!
Marcus -
Hi Mark,
I hope you're well.
Basically, the canonical tag is used to let Google know which URL it should refer to as the original source of the page content. So, if you had the following URLs that all go to the homepage:
www.domain.com/
www.domain.com/index.php
www.domain.com/home/Then Google could crawl each of these pages and identify them as three different pages all with the same content. This could say to them that there is duplicate content on the site (which is not good). Usually with the homepage Google is intelligent enough to understand that there is just one page and the /index.php for example isn't a duplicate.
The problem that you do face, especially on the site that you are optimising, is with the different pages that have information on the lettings, etc (i.e. your product pages). For example, if you look at the following URL on your website:
http://www.daft.ie/searchshortterm.daft?id=23606
This is when you go through to the short-term searches and then I find the '176 Rathgar Road' apartment. Due to the dynamically generated URL (search.shortterm.daft?id=23606) I can gather that there would be several ways to get to this page with a different URL. My first suggestion would be to set up Search Engine Friendly URLs, for example, instead of having 'http://www.daft.ie/searchshortterm.daft?id=23606', it would be:
http://www.daft.ie/short-term/dublin/176-rathgar-road-apartment/
This way you could clearly optimise the page on Google search and have the canonical link to the page as:
href="http://www.daft.ie/short-term/dublin/176-rathgar-road-apartment.html" rel="canonical" />
This would improve the SEO performance on the website and avoid duplicate content issues.
I hope this helps, but if you need any more info then just let me know.
Matt.
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
-
2 pages ranking for same keyword.. Need some advice on what to do.
Here's my question. When I first started my website we started Using keyword anchor building links To my homepage . Over the years Our business has expanded to more than just baby headbands. I now have a baby headband page. When tracking my rankings. I sometimes see Both pages in Google for the same keyword. Other days I do not see both of them. My question is Should I continue building links and keyword anchor text for the home page Or should I switch them and start building keyword-rich anchor text for my baby headband page. I'm just wondering if the Search engine is confused by the two. When searching for the keyword baby headbands. I will sometimes show up for eight and nine. 8 is my home page and 9 is for the baby headband page. I have always shown up for the keyword "baby Headbands" for my home page.
Technical SEO | | PB20070 -
I really need some help with Magento and Duplicate Page Content results I;m getting
Hi, We use Magento for our eCommerce platform and I'm getting a number of duplicate page content results. It mainly concerns the duplicate page content errors for our category pages. Firstly It seems like the product type and filter options highlighted in the picture are causing duplicate page content Also one particularity category is getting a lot from duplicate page content errors , http://www.tidy-books.co.uk/shop-all-products I understand that this category page is using duplicate pages of other category pages so I set this to exclude them from the site map but it looks likes its till being picked up? I've attached the csv file showing these errors as well. - > Any help would be massively appreciated Thanks filter.png moz-tidy-books-uk-crawl_issues-01-OCT-2014.csv
Technical SEO | | tidybooks0 -
Wrapping my head around an e-commerce anchor filter issue, need help
I am having a hard time understanding how Google will deal with this scenario, I would love to hear what you guys think or suggest. Ok a category page on the site in question looks like this. http://makeupaddict.me/6-skin-care All fine and well, But a paginated page or a filtered category pages look like these http://makeupaddict.me/6-skin-care#/page-2 and http://makeupaddict.me/6-skin-care#/price-391-1217 From my understanding Google does not index an anchor without a shebang (#!), but that doesn't mean that they do not still crawl them, correct? That is where the issue comes in, since anchors are not indexed and dropped from the urls, when Google crawls a filtered or paginated page, it is getting different results. From the best of my understanding, and someone can correct me if I am wrong but an anchor is not passed in web languages like a querystring is. So if I am using php and land on http://makeupaddict.me/6-skin-care or http://makeupaddict.me/6-skin-care#/price-391-1217 and use something like .$_SERVER['SELF'] to get the url both pages will return http://makeupaddict.me/6-skin-care since the anchor is handled client side. With that being the case, is it imagined that Google uses that standard or is it thought they have a custom function that grabs the whole url anchor in all? Also if they are crawling the page with the anchor, but seeing it anchor less how are they handling the changing content?
Technical SEO | | LesleyPaone0 -
SEO Yoast Help Needed
Anyone familar with SEO Yoast and interested in being hired to check out my settings for SEO. Thinking about 30 minute screen sharing session an helping me figure out what I am am doing wrong? Just cleaned up duplicates because of tags and now I see the images are getting duplicated as well as some of the titles. So new to Wordpress here I shine. Message me if you can help. Much Appreciated!!
Technical SEO | | Force70 -
Help needed regarding managing client expectations - tricky situation
I will try to explain the scenario as quickly as possible and my hope is that someone can share their opinion on how they would move forward. I was introduced to a local business owner who said he wanted help with SEO. Upon looking at his current online marketing, I saw he had 2 current sites promoting the same local business (martial arts instruction / classes). Why he had two sites? He said it made it easier for him to dominate in Google. Red Flag #1. Upon doing a quick site audit, I found a ton of problems with the existing site. Black text on a black background, keyword stuffing in title tags, non-canonicalization, no xml sitemap, no Google analytics installed...on and on. In addition, the site did not really have a good look to it graphically. I told him that I recommend a fresh new site using Wordpress and that we should build the content with the focus on explaining the benefits of the classes. He agreed and we began development of a new Wordpress site from the ground up. We built a sitemap, wireframe, nice design, etc. The site looks much better and we got rid of a lot of the technical problems with the site. The problem is this: Even though the new site is technically better based on On Page analysis, it is not showing up anywhere in the Top for localized keywords. The site has been live for about 2 1/2 months (March 1). I made the mistake of telling him that in a lot of cases in the past, I was able to build a new site for other clients that would rank well for localized searches based on On Page optimization alone. This is not happening for him with the new site. The new domain is relatively new (less than a year old) and has no links at all at this point. I recommended that we do a 301 redirect from his existing domain to the new one but he is skeptical and I almost can't blame him. The client is not paying me to do any SEO. The contract was to build a new site that would be built with best SEO On Page practices (Title Tags, Header Tags, Meta Desc., XML Sitemap, canonicalization, etc.) I hesitate to post the links to his existing site and the new one we built but I can see where that may shed some more light on the subject. If interested in taking a look, please send me a message. I guess the two questions are this: 1. Is it reasonable for a site to rank well for a localized non-competitive term based on A scores of on page analysis? 2. What harm or foul is there in doing a 301 redirect from the old domain to the new one and then reverting back if he decides that the move hurt his rankings more than helped? Thanks.
Technical SEO | | bluelynxmarketing0 -
Is the Sandbox Real? Need Help!
To start, I'm very new at this so I've likely made a ton of mistakes but here is the breakdown of what's happened/what's been done to my site. I own a wedding photography company which was based in Portland, we decided about six months prior that we wanted to relocate to San Diego. It was too soon to optimize our website for our new town of San Diego so I created a brand new site. It was born around June 2011. It looks just like the old site but all the content is different (different titles, re-uploaded images, text, etc was optimized for San Diego). What may be my pitfall is I imported our blog posts from the old site to the new site and we continued to keep both blogs live (writing the post in one, importing to the other). San Diego site: http://continuumweddings.com Old Site (now optimized for LA): http://continuumphotography.com From there I began link building. I signed up for the SEO Scheduler and began making the changes suggested there. It told me to sign up for Linxboss, and I did it. Other than that, my links have been build naturally and I have quite a few of them, definitely enough to compete with my top competitors. At one point I was #3 for "San Diego Wedding Photographer" and I stayed there for a couple weeks. Then I began to drop. Now I'm somewhere on page 10. I've read a lot of articles on here and I know I have a lot of things potentially hurting me. Site age, Duplicate content, etc. I'm just not sure why I dropped (still rank on 1st page in Yahoo & Bing) and what I should do about it. I tend to get overwhelmed and every post I read seems to talk about something new I may have done wrong. I'm willing to put in the time to fix this; I just need to know where my time is best spent.
Technical SEO | | mrsmelmitch0 -
Understanding the actions needed from a Crawl Report
I've just joined SEOMOZ last week and have not even received my first full-crawl yet, but as you know, I do get the re-crawl report. It shows I have 50 301's and 20 rel canonical's. I'm still very confused as to what I'm supposed to fix...And, all the rel canonical's are my sites main pages, so hence I am still equally confused as to what the canonical is doing and how do I properly setup my site. I'm a technical person and can grasp most things fairly quickly, but on this the light bulb is taking a little while longer to fire-up 🙂 If my question wasn't total jibberish and you can help shed some light, I would be forever grateful. Thank you.
Technical SEO | | apmgsmith0 -
Canonicalization - duplicate homepage issues
I'm trying to work out the best way to resolve an issue where Google is seeing duplicate versions of a homepage, i.e. http://www.home.co.uk/Home.aspx and http://www.home.co.uk/ The site runs on Windows servers. I've tried implementing redirects for homepages before (for a different site on a linux server) and ended up with a loop, so although I know I can read lots of info (as I have been doing) and try again, I am really concerned about getting it wrong. Can anyone give me some advice on the best way to make Google take just one version of the page? Obviously link juice is also being diluted so I need to get this sorted asap. Thanks.
Technical SEO | | travelinnovations0