Canonical question
-
I have at least three duplicate main pages on my website:
www.augustbullocklaw.com/index
I want the first one, www.augustbullocklaw.com to be the main page. I put this code on the index page and uploaded it to my site: http://www.augustbullocklaw.com/canonical-version-of-page/" rel="canonical" />
This code now appears on all three pages shown above. Did I do this correctly?
I surmise that www.augustbullocklaw.com is pointing to itself. Is that ok?
I don't know how to take the cononical code off the page that is the page I want to be the main page. (I don't know how to remove it from www.augustbullocklaw.com, but leave it on www.augustbullocklaw.com/index and augustbullocklaw.com)
Thanks
-
Thank you very much for that clear answer!
-
Hi August,
You've made a small error; it looks like you've used the rel canonical example from here; http://www.seomoz.org/learn-seo/duplicate-content. The "canonical-version-of-page" there is supposed to be an example of a folder on the site and shouldn't be literal, so the code on your page should be:
Where the value inside the 'href' part is the URL to the page you wish to be the canonical version. I hope that makes sense!
What Francisco is suggesting is an alternative, and often preferred, method of handling this scenario, where a user trying to visit the other (non-canonical) versions of this URL would be redirected automatically by their browser to the canonical version. This does have some advantages but I'd say it isn't significant enough for you to worry about.
Best of luck!
-
301 redirects within .htaccess. I don't have a step by step because you can google it and get the code.
-
I can't understand that at all.
Are you (or someone) able to explain step by step what to do.
How exactly does one point the non-www to the www?
-
This is an .htaccess issue. You want to point the non-www to the www. This is not a canonical issue.
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
-
Duplicate Content Question
I have a client that operates a local service-based business. They are thinking of expanding that business to another geographic area (a drive several hours away in an affluent summer vacation area). The name of the existing business contains the name of the city, so it would not be well-suited to market 'City X' business in 'City Y'. My initial thought was to (for the most part) 'duplicate' the existing site onto a new site (brand new root domain). Much of the content would be the exact same. We could re-word some things so there aren't entire lengthy paragraphs of identical info, but it seems pointless to completely reinvent the wheel. We'll get as creative as possible, but certain things just wouldn't change. This seems like the most pragmatic thing to do given their goals, but I'm worried about duplicate content. It doesn't feel as though this is spammy though, so I'm not sure if there's cause for concern.
Technical SEO | | stevefidelity0 -
Header Tag Question
While reviewing code on a site, I found the following: <h1 class="<a class="attribute-value">logo</a>"> <a id="<a class="attribute-value">logo</a>" href="[http://siteexampleh1.com](view-source:http://dmbinc.com/)"><span>Example of most important content on this page- Companyspan>a> h1> Is this the correct way to place code for an h1 tag? The content is cached within the page and is hidden to the viewer. The content that is assigned as the h1, is a logo. Majority of code I have been reviewing does not use this setup. The code would instead read as ( This is heading 1 ). Can anyone provide insights on this? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | jfeitlinger0 -
The Mysterious Case of Pagination, Canonical Tags
Hey guys, My head explodes when I think of this problem. So I will leave it to you guys to find a solution... My root domain (xxx.com) runs on WordPress platform. I use Yoast SEO plugin. The next page of root domain -- page/2/ -- has been canonicalized to the same page -- page/2/ points to page/2/ for example. The page/2/ and remaining pages also have this rel tags: I have also added "noindex,follow" to page/2/ and further -- Yoast does this automatically. Note: Yoast plugin also adds canonical to page/2/...page/3/ automatically. Same is the case with category pages and tag pages. Oh, and the author pages too -- they all have self-canonicalization, rel prev & rel next tags, and have been "noindex, followed." Problem: Am I doing this the way it should be done? I asked a Google Webmaster employee on rel next and prev tags, and this is what she said: "We do not recommend noindexing later pages, nor rel="canonical"izing everything to the first page." (My bad, last year I was canonicalizing pages to first page). One of the popular blog, a competitor, uses none of these tags. Yet they rank higher. Others following this format have been hit with every kind of Google algorithm I could think of. I want to leave it to Google to decide what's better, but then again, Yoast SEO plugin rules my blog -- okay, let's say I am a bad coder. Any help, suggestions, and thoughts are highly appreciated. 🙂 Update 1: Paginated pages -- including category pages and tag pages -- have unique snippets; no full-length posts. Thought I'd make that clear.
Technical SEO | | sidstar0 -
Canonical and 301
Hi We have recently restructured our site and 301 redirected some pages. Unfortunately the new page which we 301 to, still had the canonical tags pointing to the old pages. Would this cause google not to index the new pages....?????
Technical SEO | | jj34340 -
Canonical versus 301 for affilaite links
Affiliate links for the Volusion ecommerce shops are of the form mydomain.com/?Click=XX where XX is the affiliate ID. Volusion uses rel=canonical to redirect the affiliate links to mydomain.com. Is this a good solution? I used iDevAffiliate for another online store, and their solution was to use 301 redirects to trip off the ? string. Comments? Best,
Technical SEO | | ChristopherGlaeser
Christopher0 -
2 questions about linkbuilding
1. Are these types of sites bad to submit a link to? http://www.mompack.com/mom2mom/ 2. If I submit my product for another blog to review (in turn they write a post for me with links to my website), is this GOOD? Look forward to hearing back from you, thanks
Technical SEO | | ChrisTS0 -
Google Places Question......
Hi Guys. I am working with a photographer they do not have a studio they shoot on location. However I noticed many photographers within their industry have their home address listed in their google places, and they too shoot on location. My client doesn't want their home address listed so I wondered what options there would be? Do you think renting mail forwarding address would suffice?
Technical SEO | | RankStealer0 -
How to set up a rel canonical in big commmerce?
I have no clue how to set this up in the Bigcommerce store platform
Technical SEO | | Firestarter-SEO0
