Blog URL Canonical
-
Hi Guy's,
I would like to know your thoughts on the following set-up for blog canonical.
Option 1
domain.com/blog = <link rel="canonical" href="domin.com/blog">
domain.com/blog-category/general = <link rel="canonical" href="domain.com/blog">
domain.com/blog-article/how-to-set-canonical = no canonical
option 2
domain.com/blog = <link rel="canonical" href="domin.com blog"="">(as option 1)</link rel="canonical" href="domin.com>
domain.com/blog-category/general = <link rel="canonical" href="domain.com blog-category="" general"="">(this time has the canonical of the category)</link rel="canonical" href="domain.com>
domain.com/blog-article/how-to-set-canonical = <link rel="canonical" href="domain.com blog-article="" how-to-set-canonical"="">(this time has the canonical of the article full URL)</link rel="canonical" href="domain.com>
Just not sure which is the best option, or even if it is any of the above!
Thanks
Dan
-
Without seeing the actual site in question, that's my opinion, yes.
-
Hi Peter,
Thanks for the info, so from everything you have suggested, it seems as if my option 2 would be the better way?
In other words having a canonical for each element
domain.com/blog = <link rel="canonical" href="domin.com blog"=""></link rel="canonical" href="domin.com>
domain.com/blog-category-general = <link rel="canonical" href="domain.com blog-category="" general"=""></link rel="canonical" href="domain.com>
domain.com/blog-article/this-is-it = <link rel="canonical" href="domain.com blog-article="" this-is-it"=""></link rel="canonical" href="domain.com>
Have I understood you correctly?
Many thanks
Daniel
-
I honestly don't think that's a big deal - as long as you aren't creating tags or adding categories in a way that this could spin out of control. You've basically got 20-ish search result pages. They aren't high value, but they are useful paths to the blog content and they could rank for category keywords. I think it's a balancing act, and in many cases internal search can spin out of control and harm a site. My gut reaction, though, is that you're not in that situation, and cutting off these pages might do more harm than good.
-
Just snippets, a paragraph then a read more link to the main article.
-
Are these just snippets (link + paragraph) or are you displaying large portions of the posts on the home/category pages?
-
Hi Peter,
we don't have a have many categories less than 20, obviously when we create a new article it shows in the main domain.com/blog (for a limited time) but the same article can also appear in more than 1 of the categories, so based on this do you feel that option 2 would be the better way to go ?
many thanks
Daniel
-
It depends a bit on the site structure, but I'd actually be wary of setting the category page canonicals back up to the main blog. These aren't really duplicates, and that could send an odd signal (and potentially negative) to Google, especially if there are a lot of them.
If you're talking about a few category pages, leave it alone. Use rel=prev/next for pagination and make sure you're handling and search filters (and not spinning out URLs), but just let these pages get crawled normally. They're an important path on the site.
If you've got a ton of categories, sub-categories, and tags, then I'd go with META NOINDEX. Important note, though: in most cases, you'd use NOINDEX, FOLLOW (not NOFOLLOW) - you don't want to cut the path for crawlers to reach your individual posts. Again, this does depend a bit on the site architecture and whether you have other crawl paths.
-
Hi Tom,
Thanks for the reply, this makes perfect sense
I was unsure if we should be creating a canonical for the full blog article or just leaving it and letting Google work it out!!
I will talk to our developer about adding the noindex and no follow to the category/archive pages.
Thanks
Daniel
-
Hi Dan
I'd say it's Option 1...and a half!
As a general rule of thumb, I want to put a self-referring canonical tag (a tag that points to the same URL) on any page I'd want to rank. So, I'd have one for domain.com/blog and domain.com/blog-article/how-to-set-canonical.
For any page I want Google to disregard, in terms of ranking, will have a different URL in their canonical tag. So, you're right in this sense to have your blog category page to be like this: domain.com/blog-category/general = <link rel="canonical" href="domain.com blog"="">.</link rel="canonical" href="domain.com>
Remembering that canonical tags are a strong directive, not command, to Google, I tend to also noindex and nofollow my category and/or tag pages as well, just to be doubly sure that Google is not flagging them as duplicate. You can do this by simply adding to the head tag of the web page.
Hope this helps Dan.
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
-
Mass URL changes and redirecting those old URLS to the new. What is SEO Risk and best practices?
Hello good people of the MOZ community, I am looking to do a mass edit of URLS on content pages within our sites. The way these were initially setup was to be unique by having the date in the URL which was a few years ago and can make evergreen content now seem dated. The new URLS would follow a better folder path style naming convention and would be way better URLS overall. Some examples of the **old **URLS would be https://www.inlineskates.com/Buying-Guide-for-Inline-Skates/buying-guide-9-17-2012,default,pg.html
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kirin44355
https://www.inlineskates.com/Buying-Guide-for-Kids-Inline-Skates/buying-guide-11-13-2012,default,pg.html
https://www.inlineskates.com/Buying-Guide-for-Inline-Hockey-Skates/buying-guide-9-3-2012,default,pg.html
https://www.inlineskates.com/Buying-Guide-for-Aggressive-Skates/buying-guide-7-19-2012,default,pg.html The new URLS would look like this which would be a great improvement https://www.inlineskates.com/Learn/Buying-Guide-for-Inline-Skates,default,pg.html
https://www.inlineskates.com/Learn/Buying-Guide-for-Kids-Inline-Skates,default,pg.html
https://www.inlineskates.com/Learn/Buying-Guide-for-Inline-Hockey-Skates,default,pg.html
https://www.inlineskates.com/Learn/Buying-Guide-for-Aggressive-Skates,default,pg.html My worry is that we do rank fairly well organically for some of the content and don't want to anger the google machine. The way I would be doing the process would be to edit the URLS to the new layout, then do the redirect for them and push live. Is there a great SEO risk to doing this?
Is there a way to do a mass "Fetch as googlebot" to reindex these if I do say 50 a day? I only see the ability to do 1 URL at a time in the webmaster backend.
Is there anything else I am missing? I believe this change would overall be good in the long run but do not want to take a huge hit initially by doing something incorrectly. This would be done on 5- to a couple hundred links across various sites I manage. Thanks in advance,
Chris Gorski0 -
How and When Should I use Canonical Url Tags?
Pretty new to the SEO universe. But I have not used any canonical tags, just because there is not definitive source explaining exactly when and why you should use them??? Am I the only one who feels this way?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | greenrushdaily0 -
Does having shorter URLs help with rankings?
Hello here.I own an e-commerce website (virtualsheetmusic.com), and some of our most important category pages have pretty long URLs. Here is an example: http://www.virtualsheetmusic.com/downloads/Indici/Violin.html I am evaluating the possibility to shorten URLs like the above to something like: http://www.virtualsheetmusic.com/violin/ But since it is going to pretty hard and time consuming (considering the custom system we have in place on that site), I am trying to find out if it really matters and worth doing it from a SEO stand point. I am aware that from a user prospective shorter URLs are preferable, and we plan to pursue a better URL architecture on our website in the near future just for that, but this question, at the moment, should be strictly related to SEO. Any thoughts on this topic are very welcome!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fablau0 -
Rel=canonical
I have seen that almost all of my website pages need rel=canonical tag. Seems that something's wrong here since I have unique content to every page. Even show the homepage as a rel=canonical which doesnt make sense. Can anyone suggest anything? or just ignore those issues.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | arcade880 -
Affiliate & canonicals
Hi, any help with this one would be great.... www.example.com sells widgets online. They are also promoted on a 3rd party website www.partner.com. Currently www.partner.com links to a page on www.example.com that is completely branded with the 'partners' design, style and unique copy (you would think you were still on 'partner' website). I saw this interesting article from 2011: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/getting-seo-value-from-your-affiliate-links (in particular idea 1) Do you think adding a rel=canonical on www.example.com's partner page is still safe? All the best & thank you, Richard
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Richard5550 -
Rel=canonical on image pages
Hi, Im working on a Wordpress hosted blog site. I recently did a "site:search" in Google for a specific article page to make sure it was getting crawled, and it returned three separate URLs in the search results. One was the article page, and the other two were the URLs that hosted the images that are found in the article. Would you suggest adding the rel=canonical tag to the pages that host the images so they point back to the actual context article page? Or are they fine being left alone? Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dbfrench0 -
Canonical referencing and aspx
The following pages of my website all end up at the same place:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | IPROdigital
http://example.com/seo/Default.aspx
http://example.com/SEO/
http://example.com/seo
http://example.com/sEo
http://example.com/SeO but we have a really messy URL structure throughout the website. I would like to have a neat URL structure, including for offline marketing so customers can easily memorize or even guess the URL. I'm thinking of duplicating the pages and canonical referencing the original ones with the messy URLs instead of a 301 redirect (done for each individual page of course), because the latter will likely result in a traffic drop. We've got tens of thousands of URLs; some active and some inactive. Bearing in mind that thousands of links already point in to the site and even a small percentage drop in traffic would be a serious problem given low industry margins and high marketing spend, I'd love to hear opinions of people who have encountered this issue and found it problematic or successful. @randfish to the rescue. I hope.0 -
Automatic redirect to external urls
Hi, there is a way to create a "bridge page" with automatic url redirect ( 302 ) without google penalization? In this moment, my bridge pages are indexed on google with title and description of the redirected page.. Thanks in advance. Mauro.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | raulo790