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
-
Which URL should I choose when combining content?
I am combining content from two similar articles into one. URL 1 has a featured snippet and better URL structure, but only 5,000 page views in the last 6 month, and has 39 keywords ranking in the top 10. URL 2 has worse structure, but over 100k page views in the last 6 months, and 236 keywords in the top 10. Basically, I'm wondering if I keep the one with the better URL structure or the one with more traffic. The deleted URL will be redirected to whichever I keep.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | curtis-yakketyyak0 -
Change of URLs - Part of Migration
We are looking to change our URLs to this format /SKU/TITLE/COLOUR as part of our SEO migration.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | christwix
e.g. https://example.com.au/ac-rck-b/rolla-crew-knit/berry.html As of the moment, our URLs are TITLE/NO
e.g. https://example.com.au/rolla-crew-knit/6562563.html
(Shopify is creating a random number on the end of the URL which is representing a different colour) Is this fine SEO wise? Will this affect rankings and user experience?0 -
Rel=canonical and internal links
Hi Mozzers, I was musing about rel=canonical this morning and it occurred to me that I didnt have a good answer to the following question: How does applying a rel=canonical on page A referencing page B as the canonical version affect the treatment of the links on page A? I am thinking of whether those links would get counted twice, or in the case of ver-near-duplicates which may have an extra sentence which includes an extra link, whther that extra link would count towards the internal link graph or not. I suspect that google would basically ignore all the content on page A and only look to page B taking into account only page Bs links. Any thoughts? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | unirmk0 -
Rel canonical or redirect
Hi, my client has the following links pointing to the home page http://www.weddingrings.com/index.cfm http://www.weddingrings.com In this case would I use rel canonical or redirect?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | alexkatalkin0 -
URL for New Product
Hi, We are creating a section on our established existing website to display our new marketplace product & associated category pages. This marketplace will be a section of the site where our users can sell online training courses that they've created. It will be branded on our site as the Marketplace. Is it important to include 'marketplace' in the URL? Or would it be better to include a relevant keyword such as 'training-courses' instead? Or both? I've assumed I shouldn't use both as that would increase the length of the URLs and number of subfolders.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mindflash0 -
Renaming a URL
Hi, If we rename a URL (below) http://www.opentext.com/2/global/company/company-ecm-positioning.htm
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | pstables
to http://www.opentext.com/2/global/products/enterprise-content-management.htm (or something similar) Would search engines recognize that as a new page altogether? I know they would need to reindex it accordingly, so in theory it is kind of a "new" page. But the reason for doing this is to maintain the page's metrics (inbound links, authority, social activity, etc) instead of creating a new page from scratch. The page has been indexed highly in the past, so we want to keep it active but optimize it better and redirect other internal content (that's being phased out) to it to juice it up even more. Thanks in advance!
Greg0 -
Guest Blogging Funny Problem!
Well it made me laugh and then cry a little after anyway. I have a keyword which is ranking page 1 position 7, I created a really nice article with content relevant to the keyword maybe around 600 words. I spent maybe half hour researching blogs on myblogguest looking for one that was based in the same country, had really good mozbar stats, even checked out how quickly other posts got indexed. I put 2 anchor text links in the article and managed to get the blogger to post the article. Next day checked the rankings and the post on the blog is now position 7, and has knocked me to position 8. I'm tempted to ask the blogger to change the title tag not to include my targeted keyword. Anyone got an advice on this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | activitysuper0 -
URL Length or Exact Breadcrumb Navigation URL? What's More Important
Basically my question is as follows, what's better: www.romancingdiamonds.com/gemstone-rings/amethyst-rings/purple-amethyst-ring-14k-white-gold (this would fully match the breadcrumbs). or www.romancingdiamonds.com/amethyst-rings/purple-amethyst-ring-14k-white-gold (cutting out the first level folder to keep the url shorter and the important keywords are closer to the root domain). In this question http://www.seomoz.org/qa/discuss/37982/url-length-vs-url-keywords I was consulted to drop a folder in my url because it may be to long. That's why I'm hesitant to keep the bradcrumb structure the same. To the best of your knowldege do you think it's best to drop a folder in the URL to keep it shorter and sweeter, or to have a longer URL and have it match the breadcrumb structure? Please advise, Shawn
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Romancing0