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
-
URL Question: Is there any value for ecomm sites in having a reverse "breadcrumb" in the URL?
Wondering if there is any value for e-comm sites to feature a reverse breadcrumb like structure in the URL? For example: Example: https://www.grainger.com/category/anchor-bolts/anchors/fasteners/ecatalog/N-8j5?ssf=3&ssf=3 where we have a reverse categorization happening? with /level2-sub-cat/level1-sub-cat/category in the reverse order as to the actual location on the site. Category: Fasteners
Technical SEO | | ROI_DNA
Sub-Cat (level 1): Anchors
Sub-Cat (level 2): Anchor Bolts0 -
How should I deal with "duplicate" content in an Equipment Database?
The Moz Crawler is identifying hundreds of instances of duplicate content on my site in our equipment database. The database is similar in functionality to a site like autotrader.com. We post equipment with pictures and our customers can look at the equipment and make purchasing decisions. The problem is that, though each unit is unique, they often have similar or identical specs which is why moz (and presumably google/bing) are identifying the content as "duplicate". In many cases, the only difference between listings are the pictures and mileage- the specifications and year are the same. Ideally, we wouldn't want to exclude these pages from being indexed because they could have some long-tail search value. But, obviously, we don't want to hurt the overall SEO of the site. Any advice would be appreciated.
Technical SEO | | DohenyDrones0 -
Is this an ideal rel=canonical situation?
Hey Moz community, Thanks for taking time to answer my question. I'm working directly with a hospital that has several locations across the country. They've copied the same content over to each of their websites. Could I point the search engines back to a singular location (URL) using the rel=canonical tag? In addition, does the rel=canonical tag affect the search engine rankings of the URLs (about 13 of them) that use the rel=canonical tag? If I'm on track, is there an ideal URL (location) to decide has the original content? This is actually the first time I've ever needed to use rel=canonical (if applicable). Thanks so much. Cole
Technical SEO | | ColeLusby0 -
Staging site and "live" site have both been indexed by Google
While creating a site we forgot to password protect the staging site while it was being built. Now that the site has been moved to the new domain, it has come to my attention that both the staging site (site.staging.com) and the "live" site (site.com) are both being indexed. What is the best way to solve this problem? I was thinking about adding a 301 redirect from the staging site to the live site via HTACCESS. Any recommendations?
Technical SEO | | melen0 -
Rel="Follow"? What the &#@? does that mean?
I've written a guest blog post for a site. In the link back to my site they've put a rel="follow" attribute. Is that valid HTML? I've Googled it but the answers are inconclusive, to say the least.
Technical SEO | | Jeepster0 -
Having both <title>and <meta name="title"...> on a web page?</title>
Hi All, Client of mine using reversed Meta Tags format in their website and Honestly i never saw such Meta Tags formats. In my opinion having 2 Title tags and wrong reversed description tag is not correct and the needs to be removed, and other tags need to be changed,too But they said that it probably doesn't make a difference because weird thing is Search Engines are apparently able to index them ,So they don't think it affects search engine results and won't remove it just based on opinion. So should i persist in correcting them or just hope for the best and ignore it?!?!?! Thanks!
Technical SEO | | DigitalJungle0 -
Blank Canonical URL
So my devs have the canonical URL loaded up on pages automatically, and in most cases this gets done correctly. However we ran across a bug that left some of these blank like so: Does anyone know what effect that would have? I am trying to provide a priority for this so I can say "FIX IT NOW" or "Fix it after the other 'FIX IT NOW' type of items". Let me know if you have any ideas. I just want to be sure I am not telling google that all of these pages are like the home page. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | SL_SEM0 -
What to do about "blocked by meta-robots"?
The crawl report tells me "Notices are interesting facts about your pages we found while crawling". One of these interesting facts is that my blog archives are "blocked by meta robots". Articles are not blocked, just the archives. What is a "meta" robot? I think its just normal (since the article need only be crawled once) but want a second opinion. Should I care about this?
Technical SEO | | GPN0
