Index.php duplicate content
-
Hi, new here.
Im looking for some help with htaccess file.
index.php is showing duplicate content errors with:
ive managed to use the following code to remove the www part of the url:
IfModule mod_rewrite.c>
RewriteCond %{HTTPS} !=on
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^www.(.+)$ [NC]
RewriteRule ^ http://%1%{REQUEST_URI} [R=301,L]but how can i redirect the mysite.com/index.php and mysite.com/ to mysite.com.
Please help
-
Of course! Glad I could help.
-
Great thankyou so much.
Also another interesting person to follow on twitter
-
Once your trial runs out, you won't be able to respond, but at least you'll still be able to see my answer!
I think you can use the .htaccess file redirect command:
Redirect 301 /location/from/root/file.ext http://www.othersite.com/new/file/location.xyz
So, it should be:
Redirect 301 /index.php http://mysite.com
Redirect 301 / http://mysite.com
If that doesn't work, here's someone with the same problem on StackExchange.
P.S. Glad you like the Distilled course.
-
Hi Kristina,
No unfortunately my question was misunderstood.
It wasn't the file extension i was looking to hide.
I was looking to redirect mysite.com/index.php to mysite.com/ or mysite.com via an htaccess file.
Im currently working through distilled's online course (nice course btw) , I was hoping to get an answer here :http://www.distilled.net/u/technical/#technical-duplicate-content, (Homepage Canonicalization), but i couldnt find one
This is not a critical question, as im just tinkering around on friends sites, but i would like to learn this.
Unfortunately my free seomoz trial runs out today and im waiting until I have completed distilled's course's before i renew my moz subscription, so i can make better use of moz tools, so i may not be able to see your reply.
Is it cool to tweet @ you?
-
Hey David,
Just wanted to follow up with you on this - did TextMarketing's method work?
-
<code>## hide .php extension # To externally redirect /dir/foo.php to /dir/foo RewriteCond%{THE_REQUEST}^[A-Z]{3,}\s([^.]+)\.php [NC]RewriteRule^%1[R,L,NC]</code>
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
-
Is this duplicate content that I should be worried about?
Our product descriptions appear in two places and on one page they appear twice. The best way to illustrate that would be to link you to a search results page that features one product. My duplicate content concern refers to the following, When the customer clicks the product a pop-up is displayed that features the product description (first showing of content) When the customer clicks the 'VIEW PRODUCT' button the product description is shown below the buy buytton (second showing of content), this is to do with the template of the page and is why it is also shown in the pop-up. This product description is then also repeated further down in the tabs (third showing of content). My thoughts are that point 1 doesn't matter as the content isn't being shown from a dedicated URL and it relies on javascript. With regards to point 2, is the fact the same paragraph appears on the page twice a massive issue and a duplicate content problem? Thanks
Technical SEO | | joe-ainswoth0 -
Joomla: content accesible through all kinds of other links >> duplicate content?!
When i did a site: search on Google i've noticed all kind of URL's on my site were indexed, while i didn't add them to the Joomla navigation (or they were not linked anywhere on the site). Some examples: www.domain.com/1-articlename >> that way ALL articles are publicly visible, even if they are not linked to a menu-item... If by accident such a link get's shared it will be indexed in google, you can have 2 links with same content... www.domain.com/2-uncategorised >> same with categories, automatically these overview pages are visible to people who know this URL. On it you see all the articles that belong to that category. www.domain.com/component/content >> this gives an overview of all the categories inside your Joomla CMS I think most will agree this is not good for your site's SEO? But how can this be solved? Is this some kind of setting within Joomla? Anyone who dealt with these problems already?
Technical SEO | | conversal0 -
Sites for English speaking countries: Duplicate Content - What to do?
HI, We are planning to launch sites specific to target market (geographic location) but the products and services are similar in all those markets as we sell software.So here's the scenario: Our target markets are all English speaking countries i.e. Britain, USA and India We don't have the option of using ccTLD like .co.uk, co.in etc. How should we handle the content? Because product, its features, industries it caters to and our services are common irrespective of market. Whether we go with sub-directory or sub-domain, the content will be in English. So how should we craft the content? Is writing the unique content for the same product thrice the only option? Regards
Technical SEO | | IM_Learner0 -
Duplicate Content Issue
SEOMOZ is giving me a number of duplicate content warnings related to pages that have an email a friend and/or email when back in stock versions of a page. I thought I had those blocked via my robots.txt file which contains the following... Disallow: /EmailaFriend.asp Disallow: /Email_Me_When_Back_In_Stock.asp I had thought that the robot.txt file would solve this issue. Anyone have any ideas?
Technical SEO | | WaterSkis.com0 -
Whats with the backslash in the url adding as duplicate content?
Is this a bug or something that needs to be addressed? If so, just use a redirect?
Technical SEO | | Boogily0 -
Thin/Duplicate Content
Hi Guys, So here's the deal, my team and I just acquired a new site using some questionable tactics. Only about 5% of the entire site is actually written by humans the rest of the 40k + (and is increasing by 1-2k auto gen pages a day)pages are all autogen + thin content. I'm trying to convince the powers that be that we cannot continue to do this. Now i'm aware of the issue but my question is what is the best way to deal with this. Should I noindex these pages at the directory level? Should I 301 them to the most relevant section where actual valuable content exists. So far it doesn't seem like Google has caught on to this yet and I want to fix the issue while not raising any more red flags in the process. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | DPASeo0 -
De-indexing thin content & Panda--any advantage to immediate de-indexing?
We added the nonidex, follow tag to our site about a week ago on several hundred URLs, and they are still in Google's index. I know de-indexing takes time, but I am wondering if having those URLs in the index will continue to "pandalize" the site. Would it be better to use the URL removal request? Or, should we just wait for the noindex tags to remove the URLs from the index?
Technical SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
Canonical Link for Duplicate Content
A client of ours uses some unique keyword tracking for their landing pages where they append certain metrics in a query string, and pulls that information out dynamically to learn more about their traffic (kind of like Google's UTM tracking). Non-the-less these query strings are now being indexed as separate pages in Google and Yahoo and are being flagged as duplicate content/title tags by the SEOmoz tools. For example: Base Page: www.domain.com/page.html
Technical SEO | | kchandler
Tracking: www.domain.com/page.html?keyword=keyword#source=source Now both of these are being indexed even though it is only one page. So i suggested placing an canonical link tag in the header point back to the base page to start discrediting the tracking URLs: But this means that the base pages will be pointing to themselves as well, would that be an issue? Is their a better way to solve this issue without removing the query tracking all togther? Thanks - Kyle Chandler0