What if I point my canonicals to a URL version that is not used in internal links
-
My web developer has pointed the "good" URLs that I use in my internal link structure (top-nav/footer) to another duplicate version of my pages. Now the URLs that receive all the canonical link value are not the ones I use on my website. is this a problem and why???
In theory the implementation is good because both have equal content. But does it harm my link equity if it directs to a URL which is not included in my internal link architecture.
-
Thanks again. I hope Google will come out with some real guidelines on this subject. It saves us time arguing with third parties.
For now I will get the canonicals fixed.
-
I think Andy's absolutely right - I've seen too many situations where mixed signals caused crawl/index and even ranking problems. Ultimately, the canonical URL should be canonical in practice and used consistently. Otherwise the canonical tag is just a band-aid.
The other problem is that you naturally end up attracting links to your non-canonical URLs, because those are what people can see. Long-term, that compounds the situation.
Now, is it catastrophic? Unfortunately, that's really tough to say. I've seen situations where Google honored the canonical tag even without internal links and the site was ok. I just think it's a significant, unnecessary risk. Unfortunately, like Andy, I don't know of any clear documentation on the subject.
-
It certainly can't hurt. You might get someone pointing you to documentation relating to this exact problem
Andy
-
I don't know of anything that will explicitly tell you not to do this, but you can find lots of general information here:
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=139394
Andy
-
Allright, maybe a good question for the Google Webmaster Help Forum right?
-
Hi Andy,
I agree, it does not seem like a logical solution. Do you know of any documentation on this, maybe even from Google? I would like to give some guidelines to my web developer based on a source.
-
Quite honestly, I would never use a canonical to point to a page that no-one can navigate to. If I were Google, I would look at this and wonder if it was a recommended page, why then was this not the one people can just click on.
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
-
How to handle Friendly URLs together with internal filters search?
I've been trying to handle URLs from a unfrendly folder format to a semantic one, the thing is by doing so I end up with a longer URL and therefore a longer Title. Right now the format of my classified site for job seeking looks like this (folders): site.com/search/category/sales/level/supervisor/location/seattle/company/acme/published/2-days-ago/type/full-time/q/salesman/page/2 format: Filter/Content where at the end q is the query people are writting My suggestion is the following: Mixing Jobs with location, mixing category and level, and puting the rest of the filters at the end adding "--" between them. And adding 2 parameters, query (q) and pagination (pag) site.com/jobs-at-seattle/sales-supervisor/company/acme/full-time--published-2-days-ago?q=salesman&pag=2 Any thoughts on how to handle URLs over 100 chararcters and titles that go over 65?, or maybe is ok to have "friendly" long URLs and long titles when it comes to classified ad sites since they are based on internal filters to help people find what they are looking for. Sidenote: Is itok to have 2 parameters in the URL (Query and Pagination) Thanks a lot.
Technical SEO | | JoaoCJ0 -
Google not returning an international version of the page
I run a website that duplicates some content across international editions. These are differentiated by the country codes e.g. /uk/folder/article1/ /au/folder/article1/ The UK version is considered the origin of the content. We currently use hreflang to differentiate content, however there is no actual regional or language variation between the content on these pages. Recently the UK version of a specific article is being indexed by Google as I am able to access via keyword search, however when I try to search for it via: site:domain.com/uk/folder/article1/then it is not displaying, however the AU version is. Identical articles in the same folder are not having this issue. There are no errors within webmaster tools and I have recently refetched the specific URL. Additionally when checking for internal links to the UK and AU edition of the article, I am getting internal links for the AU edition of the article however no internal links for the UK edition of the article. The main reason why this is problematic is because the article is now no longer appearing on the UK edition of the site for internal site search. How can I find out why Google is not getting a result when the URL is entered but it is coming up when doing a specific search?
Technical SEO | | AndDa0 -
Confused on footer links (Which are best practices for footer links on other websites?)
Hello folks, We are eCommerce web design and Development Company and we give do follow links of our website to every projects which we have done with specific keywords. So now the concern is we are seeing huge amount of back-links are being generated from single root domain for particular keyword in webmaster tools. So what should be the best way to practice this? Should we give no follow attribute to it or can use our company logo with link? LtMjHER.png
Technical SEO | | CommercePundit0 -
Quality links are beneficial, but are neutral links detrimental?
So obviously a link profile featuring quality / authoritative / relavant in-bound links is preferable, but here's my question: If I'm starting work on a brand new domain, should I build links that one would consider neutral (i.e. from a non-spammy, but unrelated site) or should I not bother and only focus on quality links? Thanks
Technical SEO | | underscorelive0 -
Why doesn't SEOmoz see internal/external links on my site?
My SEOmoz analysis that my site contains neither external or internal lnks. I have used other tools and they have all seen the internal and external links on the pages. There aren't many but they are there. Why isn't SEOmoz seeing them?
Technical SEO | | iain0 -
Will rel canonical tags remove previously indexed URLs?
Hello, 7 days ago, we implemented canonical tags to resolve duplicate content issues that had been caused by URL parameters. These "duplicate content" had already been indexed. Now that the URLs have rel canonical tags in place, will Google automatically remove from its index the other URLs with the URL parameters? I ask because we have been tracking the approximate number of URLs indexed by doing a site: search in Google, and we have barely noticed a decrease in URLs indexed. Thanks.
Technical SEO | | yacpro130 -
Diagnostic says too many links on a page and most of the pages are from blog entries. Are tags considered links? How do I decrease links?
I just ran my first diagnostic on my site and the results came back were negative in the area of too many links one a page. There were also quite a few 404 errors. What is the best way to fix these problems? Most of the pages with too many links are from blog posts, are the tags counted as well and is this the reason for too many links?
Technical SEO | | Newport10300 -
Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical
When using the On page report card I get a critical error on Rel Canonical Im not sure if I have understood this right but I think that my problem is that I own a Norwegian Domain name which is www.danske-båten.no This domain works great in norwegian, but I get problems with english (foreign) browsers. My english domain name is http://www.danske-båten.no. When you buy a domain name with the letter Å you get a non norwegian domain name as well. (dont quite get the tecnical aspect of it) Så when I publish a page (using wordpress if that means anything) I get this message: Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical Moderate fix <dl> <dt>Canonical URL</dt> <dd>"http://www.danske-båten.no/ferge-oslo-københavn/"</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>If the canonical tag is pointing to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. Make sure you're targeting the right page (if this isn't it, you can reset the target above) and then change the canonical tag to reference that URL.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>We check to make sure that IF you use canonical URL tags, it points to the right page. If the canonical tag points to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. If you've not made this page the rel=canonical target, change the reference to this URL. NOTE: For pages not employing canonical URL tags, this factor does not apply.</dd> <dd>So What to do to fix this?
Technical SEO | | stlastla
</dd> </dl>0
