Duplicate Content & Canonicals
-
I am a bit confused about canonicals and whether they are "working" properly on my site. In Webmaster Tools, I'm showing about 13,000 pages flagged for duplicate content, but nearly all of them are showing two pages, one URL as the root and a second with parameters. Case in point, these two are showing as duplicate content:
http://www.gallerydirect.com/art/product/vincent-van-gogh/starry-night
We have a canonical tag on each of the pages pointing to the one without the parameters. Pages with other parameters don't show as duplicates, just one root and one dupe per listing,
So, am I not using the canonical tag properly? It is clearly listed as:Is the tag perhaps not formatted properly (I saw someone somewhere state that there needs to be a /> after the URL, but that seems rather picky for Google)?Suggestions?
-
Thanks, Dr. Pete.
I'll discuss the options with our dev team and see which one will cause the least amount of developer caffeine consumption.
-
Argh... sorry, I didn't even check/see that. Yeah, that may be a real problem - you're basically sending two canonicalization signals that are in conflict. Is there any way to hide the defaults? If the canonicals point to (A), but then (A) redirects to (B), Google may just ignore the canonical.
Unfortunately, your options are to either: (1) hope for the best, (2) canonical to the uglier URL, or (3) kill the redirect and set the default parameters on the server-side (without resetting the URL).
I am primarily seeing the canonical URL in Google's index, so I'm not sure it's actually causing you harm. It's just not an ideal situation.
-
Dr. Pete:
I'm looking into it to be sure, but I believe that you are correct in that this is an ad-tracking URL.
A follow up question:
The URL that is the canonical version of each page would be in the format of
http://www.gallerydirect.com/art/product/vincent-van-gogh/starry-night
However, this exact URL redirects to one with default parameters for substrate, style and frame size:
Should we change our canonical from the first URL (without the parameters) to the second URL with the parameters? Or is that a moot point with Google?
-
While the properly closed tag should have "... />", that's generally only an issue in very isolated cases. I've never seen it interfere with a canonical tag. It's a harmless change to make (and it is more correct), but my gut reaction is that this will make no difference. Google should be honoring these canonicals.
One odd thing I'm seeing. If I dig into the index, I'm finding the following page:
This may be an ad-tracking URL (?) and it's redirecting somehow (but not with a 301 or 302) to the non-canonical URL. This may be sending a mixed signal, and ideally it would redirect to the canonical version of the URL. I'm not sure where this version is coming from, so it's a bit hard to diagnose.
-
Hi Darin
The tag is not working because if you go into Google and enter the URL: http://www.gallerydirect.com/art/product/vincent-van-gogh/starry-night?substrate_id=3&product_style_id=8&frame_id=63&size=25x20 you will see that it is being indexed on Google.
If it's being indexed, then it runs the risk of duplicate content issues.
The tag definitely does need the /> at the end, so the correct usage of the tag would be: rel="canonical" href="http://www.gallerydirect.com/art/product/vincent-van-gogh/starry-night" />
I think if you implement that small change, there shouldn't be any problems.
Hope this helps.
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
-
Website Redesign & Ensuring Minimal Traffic/Rankings Lost
Hi there, We have undergone a website redesign (mycompany.com) and our site is ready to go live however the new website is built on a different platform so all of our blog pages will not be copied over - to avoid a large web developer expense. So our intention is to then leave all the blog pages as (on the old web design) but move it to the domain blog.mycompany.com with 301 redirects inserted on mycompany.com for each blog post pointing to the corresponding blog.mycompany.com. Is there anything else we should do to ensure minimal traffic/rankings are lost? Thank you so much for your help.
Web Design | | amitbroide0 -
Canonical and Sitemap issue
Hi all, I was told that I could change my homepage Canonical tag to match that of my XML sitemap, this sitemap is being generated for me automatically and shows the homepage as e.g. https://www.mysite.com/index.html, yet my Canonical tag has been set to https://www.mysite.com. Google currently shows as https://www.mysite.com/ being indexed, but https://www.mysite.com/index.html is not currently displayed in search results. Can someone please tell me if I should change the Canonical to the index.html version, or if I should do nothing, or remove the Canonical tag altogether? Thank you for looking.
Web Design | | scarebearz0 -
AMP Design help please
Hello Moz Friends So Google is nudging me to submit an AMP version of my website, but I'm no coder. In fact I'm a Wordpress Addict. So I'm just curious if you have created an AMP version, what do you use? Or did you have to recode an entire new website? Thank you friends! Chris
Web Design | | asbchris0 -
How to change the entire contents and design in my site without getting troubles with google?
Hello everyone This is my first post over here. In the next few weeks we going to change the entire content and design in our site. The site has 240 pages with poor contents and design. Except 301 redirects for all the old url’s I wanted to consult with you what is the right way to do it without harm my organic traffic that come from google? How google refers to this kind of changes? Which steps should I need to take to do it properly? Hope to get your help in the issue. Tahnks in advance.
Web Design | | JonsonSwartz0 -
Off Screen Rendering & Other Tactics
Hi Folks, We're currently trying to change our website search results to render in HTML in the first instance then switch off to AJAX when our user clicks on filters. But we came across an issue that diminishes the user experience, so we used this method below: We have moved the search grid offscreen in the initial rendering because we execute a lot of Javascript that modifies the DOM within the grid. Also when a user has performed a search from within the page, the hash is updated to identify the new search terms. Because this is not sent to the server, a user who has done a search and refreshes would see incorrect search results initially and the correct search results would then replace them. For example, on initial search a user reaches a URL akin to search.veer.com/chicken. When they perform a search from on that page, the hash gets updated tosearch.veer.com/chicken#keyword=monkey. If the user refreshes the page, the server only receives the request for chicken and then serves up the page with those results rendered on it. The Javascript then checks the hash and determines that it needs to run a different search and fires off an AJAX call to get the new results. If we did not render the results offscreen the user would see the results for chicken (confusingly) and be able to briefly interact with them until the AJAX call returns and the results are replaced with the correct monkey results. By rendering offscreen, the initial results are not visible and the Javascript can move them immediately onscreen if there is no hash, or wait until the AJAX call returns and then rebuild the grid and move it onscreen. Now I know that rendering text indent to -9999 is a black hat SEO tactic. But, would it be the same in this case? We're only doing this avoid bad UI. Please advise. Also, we came across these two articles that may serve alternative options. These article state that each tactic is SEO-friendly, but I'd like to run it my the community and see if you guys agree. http://joshblog.net/2007/08/03/make-your-rich-internet-application-seo-friendly/ http://www.inqbation.com/tools-to-increase-accessibility-in-the-web/ Thank you for your help!
Web Design | | CorbisVeer0 -
How will it affect my site if i link to a site with adult content?
We are currently working on creating 2 sites for a company, one with no adult content, one with adult content. Will it affect the non adult content site if i link to the other one in terms of Google and being blocked by some internet providers.
Web Design | | MattWheatcroft0 -
How much content is too much? Best Pages For Content?
To my understanding content has a lot to do with organic rankings if written correctly. My question is, how much content is too much and what pages are best to place content. Our company sells very costly products. Our customers call to purchase, we do not have an eCommerce site. Write now we have on average 350 words per page. We have about 200+ pages. Each page is written for that general category and each product has its own unique content. It seems to me that the pages with less content, tend to rank a bit better. As we are in the process of redoing our website, is there any recommendations on writing content, or adjusting the amount of text. I am thinking a lot of our text is informative only to a certain extent. Would writing content just for the main category page be better, and then on the actual product page, have only about 250 words as a description? Are there any other recommendations for SEO that are fairly new? Besides the Title, Description, Heading Tags, Image Alts, URLS etc.
Web Design | | hfranz0 -
Duplicate Content for index.html
In the Crawl Diagnostics Summary, it says that I have two pages with duplicate content which are: www.mywebsite.com/ www.mywebsite.com/index.html I read in a Dream Weaver tutorial that you should name your home page "index.html" and then you can let www.mywebsite.com automatically direct the user to index.html. Is this a bug in SEOMoz's crawler or is it a real problem with my site? Thank you, Dan
Web Design | | superTallDan0