Rel="canonical"
-
HI,
I have site named www.cufflinksman.com related to Cufflinks. I have also install WordPress in sub domain blog.cufflinksman.com.
I am getting issue of duplicate content a site and blog have same categories but content different.
Now I would like to rel="canonical" blog categories to site categories.
http://www.cufflinksman.com/shop-cufflinks-by-hobbies-interests-movies-superhero-cufflinks.html
http://blog.cufflinksman.com/category/superhero-cufflinks-2/
Is possible and also have any problem with Google with this trick?
-
Hi John,
Thanks for your reply. I understand your point. Now guide me what I have to do with these plenty of categories and tags at blog.cufflinksman.com . As SEOmoz showing approx 1600 duplicate content due to categories and tags at blog.
What approach you suggest me to remove these duplicate content and also improving ranking of cufflinksman.com(Our main site).
Hope you suggest excellent solution for this as I didn't like to no index these categories and tag as they have excellent content.
-
I will agree with John and in addition to that if it is possible for you to add no index to blog’s category pages it will better!
-
I wouldn't do that. rel=canonical is supposed to point between truly or near-truly duplicate pages, usually when things like URL parameters are on URLs but don't do anything to the content. These are completely different pages, category pages on your site, vs. ones on your blog. I would not recommend it. Chances are Google will just ignore your rel=canonical. It would likely not do any damage to your rankings, but who knows down the line... you never know when they'll release a Google aardvark or some other animal from the Google zoo.
Note my work firewall blocked the blog URL so I was looking at a cached version on Google. If the pages are truly duplicate (which they didn't appear to be), go for it.
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
-
Rel=canonical and redirect on same page
Hi Guys, Am I going slightly mad but why would you want to have a redirect and a canonical redirecting back to the same page. For Instance https://handletrade.co.uk/pull-handles/pull-handles-zcs-range/d'-pull-handle-19mm-dia.-19-x-150mm-ss/?tag=Dia.&page=2 and in the source code:- <link href="<a class="attribute-value">https://handletrade.co.uk/d'-pull-handle-19mm-dia.-19-x-150mm-ss/</a>" rel="<a class="attribute-value">canonical</a>" /> Perfect! exactly what it is intended to do. But then this page is 301 redirected tohttps://handletrade.co.uk/pull-handles/pull-handles-zcs-range/d'-pull-handle-19mm-dia.-19-x-150mm-ss/ The site is built in open cart and I think it's the SEO plugin that needs tweaking. Could this cause poor SERP visibility? This is happening across the whole site. Surely the canonical should just point to the proper page and then there is no need for an additional bounce.
Technical SEO | | nezona1 -
How do I "undo" or remove a Google Search Console change of address?
I have a client that set a change of address in Google Search Console where they informed Google that their preferred domain was a subdomain, and now they want Google to also consider their base domain (without the change of address). How do I get the change of address in Google search console removed?
Technical SEO | | KatherineWatierOng0 -
"One Page With Two Links To Same Page; We Counted The First Link" Is this true?
I read this to day http://searchengineland.com/googles-matt-cutts-one-page-two-links-page-counted-first-link-192718 I thought to myself, yep, thats what I been reading in Moz for years ( pitty Matt could not confirm that still the case for 2014) But reading though the comments Michael Martinez of http://www.seo-theory.com/ pointed out that Mat says "...the last time I checked, was 2009, and back then -- uh, we might, for example, only have selected one of the links from a given page."
Technical SEO | | PaddyDisplays
Which would imply that is does not not mean it always the first link. Michael goes on to say "Back in 2008 when Rand WRONGLY claimed that Google was only counting the first link (I shared results of a test where it passed anchor text from TWO links on the same page)" then goes on to say " In practice the search engine sometimes skipped over links and took anchor text from a second or third link down the page." For me this is significant. I know people that have had "SEO experts" recommend that they should have a blog attached to there e-commence site and post blog posts (with no real interest for readers) with anchor text links to you landing pages. I thought that posting blog post just for anchor text link was a waste of time if you are already linking to the landing page with in a main navigation as google would see that link first. But if Michael is correct then these type of blog posts anchor text link blog posts would have value But who is' right Rand or Michael?0 -
Authorship Markup worth it for "invisible" authors
Greetings everyone! Background I help run multiple continuing education sites for Allied Health professionals. Our editors do a great job of getting some of the best authors in their respective fields to come onto the site and present webinars and we publish articles around those presentations. I would love to be able to use the rel=author tag on these sites as the authors we use help to improve our credibility when a user is on the site and I would like to take advantage of this in the SERPs. The issue is that while most of these authors are leaders in their respective fields and have published in many academic publications, they are not on Facebook or Twitter, let alone Google+. Also, they are probably not interested in setting up a G+ profile. They are "famous" and well published within their fields, yet they are somewhat "invisible" on the web. We are looking to implement author bios on our site and then could use the rel=author tag internally so that seems like a good first step. The question is then around linking out with rel=me to any profiles (FB, Twitter, G+) The issue is that, as I mentioned above, the online profiles are pretty scarce. Question / Discussion Is it worth it to setup all the authorship markup to internal bios on a site when many of the authors are "invisible" on G+, twitter, FB, etc. and so I will be limited in how I can link rel=me to those profiles. If the Google+ profile is not available for an author, what do you prefer to link to. Would you say FB over Twitter as FB has more users, or if a user has both profiles, but uses twitter more often, would you link to the Twitter profile instead? Many of these authors work at the university and have a bio page on the university website, would it be working linking to that profile? How do you judge the "best" place to link to if there is no Google+ profile. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | CleverPhD0 -
How many steps for a 301 redirect becomes a "bad thing"
OK, so I am not going to worry now about being a purist with the htaccess file, I can't seem to redirect the old pages without redirect errors (project is an old WordPress site to a redesigned WP site). And the new site has a new domain name; and none of the pages (except the blog posts) are the same. I installed the Simple 301 redirects plugin on old site and it's working (the Redirection plugin looks very promising too, but I got a warning it may not be compatible with the old non-supported theme and older v. of WP). Now my question using one of the redirect examples (and I need to know this for my client, who is an internet marketing consultant so this is going to be very important to them!): Using Redirect Checker, I see that http://creativemindsearchmarketing.com/blog --- 301 redirects to http://www.creativemindsearchmarketing.com/blog --- which then 301 redirects to final permanent location of http//www.cmsearchmarketing.com/blog How is Google going to perceive this 2-step process? And is there any way to get the "non-www-old-address" and also the "www-old-address" to both redirect to final permanent location without going through this 2-stepper? Any help is much appreciated. _Cindy
Technical SEO | | CeCeBar0 -
.Rel=author
For the purpose of implementing rel=author, 1. Whether http://www.ultraseo.com/blogs/ is my "Author page" 2. Where should i link from my Google profile to website http://www.ultraseo.com/ I mean, in which tab or section in Google profile should i link back to website ?
Technical SEO | | seoug_20050 -
Hyphenated Domain Names - "Spammy" or Not?
Some say hyphenated domain names are "spammy". I have also noticed that Moz's On Page Keyword Tool does NOT recognize keywords in a non-hyphenated domain name. So one would assume neither do the bots. I noticed obviously misleading words like car in carnival or spa in space or spatula, etc embedded in domain names and pondered the effect. I took it a step further with non-hyphenated domain names. I experimented by selecting totally random three or four letter blocks - Example: randomfactgenerator.net - rand omf act gene rator Each one of those clips returns copious results AND the On-Page Report Card does not credit the domain name as containing "random facts" as keywords**,** whereas www.business-sales-sarasota.com does get credit for "business sales sarasota" in the URL. This seems an obvious situation - unhyphenated domains can scramble the keywords and confuse the bots, as they search all possible combinations. YES - I know the content should carry it but - I do not believe domain names are irrelevant, as many say. I don't believe that hyphenated domain names are not more efficient than non hyphenated ones - as long as you don't overdo it. I have also seen where a weak site in an easy market will quickly top the list because the hyphenated domain name matches the search term - I have done it (in my pre Seo Moz days) with ft-myers-auto-air.com. I built the site in a couple of days and in a couple weeks it was on page one. Any thoughts on this?
Technical SEO | | dcmike0 -
Canonical Tag
Does it do anything to place the Canonical tag on the unique page itself? I thought this was only to be used on the offending pages that are the copies. Thanks
Technical SEO | | poolguy0
