Hreflang and canonicalization
-
When using hreflang in order to deliver the relevant version in SERs, should we also make use of a reference to a canonical version to avoid duplication?
Currently, we provide different regional versions of our content where the content is largely the same aside from minor changes due to spelling, units of measurement although occasionally larger amends are required.
We have implemented hreflang referencing all the alternative country Urls, e.g en-us, en-gb, en-aus etc but also specificied the canonical as the en-gb version since we are a UK based website and the majority of the content originated from the UK version of our site.
Recently, our rankings across all countries have been falling markedly and I'm wondering whether the canonical element may be at fault. We have not been engaging in any black hat activities that might have been responsible for any sort of fall.
When we implemented the hreflang and canonical in July 2012 our traffic has actually been increasing significantly until literally 21 Nov when the search traffic is plummeting considerably across all countries. It would be useful to know if you need to specify a canonical version when using hreflang or could there be another reason for our ranking falls.
Many thanks in advance of your assistance.
-
you can test it out and remove the canonical for the not fully equivalent pages ... and unfortunately there is no other solution than a canonical to fix the pages that have a fully equivalent content.
just test it out and keep a close eye on it and please do update this thread
thank u
-
Thanks Wissam. I posted the same question in a Google forum and was told that I should remove the canonical reference (but retain the hrelang elements) as some of the content was not entirely identical and had regional differences.
I've asked whether I should do the same (i.e not specify a canonical) when the content is entirely identical but equally relevant to different countries. Would the hreflang be enough to prevent them being considered duplicate?
-
Hi Simon
I think the implementation you did on the site is confusing and wrong.
you consolidated ur au to the .com domain without specifying which folder or subdomainis the au section is.
previously because you have the .com.au in the domain Google understood that signal that this website is relevant to au visitors. but when you consolidated to the .com you need now to TELL or HINT to Google (through Google Webmaster Tools) where the whole domain that was targeting this country went.
and HREFLANG is not about Geotargeting but about the Language.
-
Hi Wissam, yes indeed all the pages are informative article pages. I want each country specific version to rank highly in it's own country i.e en-us article to rank in US, en-au in Australia etc. Does specifying a canonical strangle your ranking in all the other countries?
-
Google has actually updated their Google webmaster help section of the hreflang and remove the reference of rel canonical because people tend to get confused and implemented incorrectly.
so my question to you are these pages informational pages? are they fully equivalent to the others ? in aus and us ?
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
-
X Default on hreflang tags
Hi guys, I would like to clarify something about hreflang markups and most importantly, x-default. Sample URLs:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | geekyseotools
http://www.example.com/au/collection/dresses (Australia)
http://www.example.com/us/collection/dresses (United States)
http://www.example.com/uk/collection/dresses (United Kingdom) Sample Markups: Questions:
1. Can I use my AU page as x default? I noticed that some x default are US. Note that my biggest market is AU though.
2. If I indeed use AU page as x default, and the user is searching from China, does it mean that Google will return my AU page?
3. Can you spot any issues with these markups I made? Anything that I need to correct. Keen to hear from you! Cheers,
Chris0 -
Setting Up Hreflang and not getting return tag errors
I've set up a dummy domain (Not SEO'd I know) in order to get some input on if I'm doing this correctly. Here's my option on the set up and https://technicalseo.com/seo-tools/hreflang/ is saying it's all good. I'm self-referencing, there's a canonical, and there is return tags. https://topskiphire.com - US & International English Speaking Version https://topskiphire.com/au/ - English language in Australia The Australian version is on a subdirectory. We want it this way so we get full value of our domain and so we can expand into other countries eventually e.g. UK. Q1. Should I be self-referencing or should I have only a canonical for US site? Q2. Should I be using x-default if we're only in the English language? Q3. We previously failed when we had errors come back saying 'return tags not found' on a separate site even though the tags were on both sites. Was this because our previous site was only new and Google didn't rank it as often as our main domain.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cian_murphy0 -
Multiple hreflang tags pointing to one page from the same country
Hi All, Hypothetically, let’s say a brand established in the UK created the following URL for the Italian market, www.example.com/it/ticket-watch (Ticket watch the made up brand) In this scenario, Ticket Watch is used across multiple services and domains in the UK such as: www.example.com/ticket-watch www.ticketwatch.com/ Essentially, could you point multiple ticket watch pages that live on different domains so that www.example.com/it/ticket-watch could potentially have 4 or 5 tags from the same country (UK), but the self-referencing pages will only have one hreflang tag: canonical and hreflang meta information to be included on www.example.com/it/ticket-watch But the hreflang meta information to be included on www.ticketwatch.com/ will only have one tag I’ve only in included 2 hreflang tags for the for the first example but let’s say there were an additional 2 or 3 GB based ticket watch hreflang tags. Will these tags still be validated? Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SEONOW1230 -
Is 1:1 301 redirect required on indexed URL when restructing URL even if the new URL is canonicalized?
Hello folks, We are restructuring some URLS which forms a fair chunk of the content of the domain.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HB17
These content are auto generated rather than manually created unlike other parts of the website. The same content is currently accessible from two URLs: /used-books/autobiography-a-long-walk-to-freedom-isbn
/autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-isbn The URL 1 uses the URL 2 as the canonical url and it has worked allright since Moz does
not show the two as duplicate of each other. Google has also indexed the canonical URL although
there is still a few 'URL 1s' which were indexed before the canonical was implemented. The updated URL structure will look like something like this: /used-books/autobiography-a-long-walk-to-freedom-author-name-isbn
/autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-authore-name-isbn It would be great to have just a single URL but a few business requirement prevents
us from having just the canonical URL only even with the new structure. Since we will still have two URLs to access the same content and we were wondering
whether we will need to do a 1:1 301 redirect on the current URLs or since there will be canonical URL
(/autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-authore-name-isbn),
we won't need to worry about doing the 1:1 redirect on the the indexed content? Please note that the content will still be accessible from the OLD URL (unless 301ed of course). If it is advisable to do a 1:1 301 redirect this is what we intend to do: /used-books/autobiography-a-long-walk-to-freedom-isbn 301 to
/used-books/autobiography-a-long-walk-to-freedom-author-name-isbn /autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-isbn 301 to
/autobiography/used-books/a-long-walk-to-freedom-authore-name-isbn Any advice/suggestions would be greated appreciated. Thank you.0 -
Should eCommerce Canonicalize to CMS
We have inherited a site that has a Joomla CMS "showroom" front-end and a Magento "store room" for check out etc. Question - As the site's main pages are in the CMS section should we: make all Magento product pages canonical to the main sections/product pages within the CMS (even though there are no duplicate content issues) "No index" the product pages Index but indicate low page value in sitemap Do something else? 🙂 Thanks for any and all input!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TheNorthernOffice790 -
Sitemaps: Alternate hreflang
Hi, some time ago I have read that there is a limit of 50.000 URLs per sitemap file (So, you need to create a sitemap index and separate files with 50.000 urls each). [Source]. Now we are about to implement the link hreflang in the sitemap [Source], and we dont know if we have to count each alternate as a different url. We have 21 different well positioned domains (Same name, different cctlds, a little different content [varies in currencies, taxes, some labels, etc] depending in the target country) so the amount of links per url would be high. A) Shall we count each link alternate as a separate url, or just the original ones? For example, if we have to count the link alternates, that would make us have 2380pages per sitemap, each with one original url and 20 alternate links. (Always being aware of the 50mb maximum filesize) B) Actually we have one sitemap per domain. Using this, shall we generate one per domain using the matching domain as original url? Or it would be the same if we upload to every domain the same sitemap? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | marianoSoler980 -
Use of rel="alternate" hreflang="x"
Google states that use of rel="alternate" hreflang="x" is recommended when: You translate only the template of your page, such as the navigation and footer, and keep the main content in a single language. This is common on pages that feature user-generated content, like a forum post. Your pages have broadly similar content within a single language, but the content has small regional variations. For example, you might have English-language content targeted at readers in the US, GB, and Ireland. Your site content is fully translated. For example, you have both German and English versions of each page. Does this mean that if I write new content in different language for a website hosted on my sub-domain, I should not use this tag? Regards, Shailendra Sial
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | IM_Learner0 -
Any Case Study of Reversion of Canonicalization?
Hi, Understand that if a Page A is being canonicalized to Page B, most probably Page B's ranking will increase (given their content and structure are all the same). But when the canonical tags are removed from Page B, Page A's rankings and traffic may recover to the original before it was canonicalized. The theories seem very true but does anyone have any case studies or direct experiences which proves these theories? Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | globalsources.com0