When we have 301 page is a Rel=Canonical needed or should we make 1 Noindex?
-
Hi,
When we have a page as 301 (Permanent Redirect) is a Rel=Canonical needed or should we make 1 Noindex?
Example
http://www.Somename.com/blog/138760
when clicked goes to
http://www.Somename.com/blogs/whenittyam
Should i noindex the below pages
http://www.Somename.com/blog/138760
and add Rel=Canonical
Thanks
-
If you have a 301, you use the 301, done, mission accomplished. Google should drop the original page and start to use the new page in its place in the SERPs. This is also automatic for the user as they are moved from one page to the other. One thing, you want to make sure that the page that you are sending people to is semantically related to the page that they were sent from, otherwise you risk losing rank in the SERPs.
If you use the 301, there is no original "page" that you can put the canonical or a noindex.
If you could not 301, you would want to only use the canonical. Google usually will treat a canonical like a 301.
If you use a canonical, you should not have to use the noindex.
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
-
Should you change Temporary redirects 302's to a 301 even if page is not important/intended for ranking ?
Hi Whilst i appreciate its best practice to 301 redirect permanently moved pages, what if the page is say a login page or other page you not really interested in ranking or transferring juice to ? is it still important/best practice to do so simply because the page has permanently moved hence should still be a 301 even though you don't really want it to rank ? cheers dan
Technical SEO | | Dan-Lawrence1 -
Should I Parent/Child my Website Pages (need help with terminology too)
Hello I have a website that I am trying to SEO optimise.
Technical SEO | | NikitaG
The current structure of the site is that all pages are linked directly after the domain:
example: www.domain.com**/page01** www.domain.com**/page02** The website is however logically organised in the following form:
www.domain.com**/page01/page02** Sometimes the parenting goes to 3 levels: (please help me with the right term here) Domain
↳ Page001
↳ Page002
↳Page003 My question is: should keep the current structure, or is it worth the effort to re-link the website in a parented way. Are there any benefites to one or the other, and could you point to some video tutorials or documentation to read. BqoDAsx.jpg DMMIC5o.jpg0 -
Will rel=canonical work here?
Dear SEOMOZ groupies, I manage several real estate sites for SEO which we have just taken over. After running the crawl on each I am find 1000's of errors relating to just a few points and wanted to find out either suggestion to fix or if the rel=canonical will resolve it as it is in bulk. Here are the problems...Every property has the following so the more adverts the more errors. each page has a contact agent url. all of these create dup title and content each advert has the same with printer friendly each advert has same with as a favorites page several other but I think you get the idea. Help!!! .... suggestions overly welcome Steve
Technical SEO | | AkilarOffice0 -
301 Redirect / cross-domain canonical to a URL w/ Ampersand
I have a question regarding ampersands, we are needing to redirect to a URL w/ an ampersand in the URL: http://local.sfgate.com/b18915250/Sam-&-Associates-Insurance-Agency Will Google pass page authority/juice despite the fact that there is an ampersand in the URL, if we were to 301 redirect or cross-domain canonical to the url? Should we 301 redirect to http://local.sfgate.com/b18915250/Sam-%26-Associates-Insurance-Agency instead of http://local.sfgate.com/b18915250/Sam-&-Associates-Insurance-Agency? I don't have the option of removing the ampersand Thank you for your time!
Technical SEO | | Gatelist0 -
According to 1 of my PRO campaigns - I have 250+ pages with Duplicate Content - Could my empty 'tag' pages be to blame?
Like I said, my one of my moz reports is showing 250+ pages with duplicate content. should I just delete the tag pages? Is that worth my time? how do I alert SEOmoz that the changes have been made, so that they show up in my next report?
Technical SEO | | TylerAbernethy0 -
Is it better to delete web pages that I don't want anymore or should I 301 redirect all of the pages I delete to the homepage or another live page?
Is it better for SEO to delete web pages that I don't want anymore or should I 301 redirect all of the pages I delete to the homepage or another live page?
Technical SEO | | CustomOnlineMarketing0 -
Should rel canonical tags include the root domain
It does sound like a silly question but bear with me a little... I recently installed on my Joomla website a module that automatically creates rel canonical tags for pages that contain lists that can be sorted by different criteria: (price, alphabetic order, etc...) I know that a proper canonical tag should look like this: However, the module I'm using creates the following structure Will this work? I mean, will it be "understood" by the bots? To see what the module actually does, you can visit the following link http://www.quipeutlefaire.fr/fr/index.php?sort=price&sort_direction=desc&limit=10&limitstart=0&option=com_auctions&category=240 In the source code you will see that the canonical tag is Which is the original "unsorted" page. Thanks in advance for your help
Technical SEO | | QPLF0 -
Why does SEOMos Pro include noindex pages?
I'm new to SEOMoz. Been digesting the crawl data and have a tonne of action items that we'll be executing on fairly soon. Love it! One thing I noticed is in some of crawl warnings include pages that expressly have the ROBOTS meta tag with the "noindex" value. Example: many of my noindex pages don't include meta descriptions. Therefore, is it safe to ignore warnings of this nature for these pages?
Technical SEO | | ChatterBlock0