Are URL suffixes ignored by Google? Or is this duplicate content?
-
Example URLs:
www.example.com/great-article-on-dog-hygiene.html
www.example.com/great-article-on-dog-hygiene.rt-article.html
My IT dept. tells me the second instance of this article would be ignored by Google, but I've found a couple of instances in which Google did index the 'rt-article.html' version of the page.
To be fair, I've only found a couple out of MANY.
Is it an issue?
Thanks,
Trisha
-
As Lesley says, it's not ignored. If the content is exactly the same on both URLs, you can ask your IT folks to include a rel=canonical directive in the header that sets the canonical version of the content to one specific URL or, if a URL isn't needed, it can be 301 redirected to the proper URL.
-
They are not ignored by google, they would be seen as duplicate content if the same content is used on each page. Also one thing you should keep in mind too is that you will be diluting the keywords in the page name by adding more.
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
-
Can the design still be considered adaptive if the URL is different?
I was under the impression our site had a mobile dedicated design, but my developers are telling me we have an adaptive design. The mobile site is set up different and has different content and the url is as follows: www.site.com/MobileView/MobileHome.aspx Can it still be considered adaptive if the URL is not the exact same? Hopefully this make sense and I appreciate anyone's input!
Web Design | | AliMac260 -
Google text-only vs rendered (index and ranking)
Hello, can someone please help answer a question about missing elements from Google's text-only cached version.
Web Design | | cpawsgo
When using JavaScript to display an element which is initially styled with display:none, does Google index (and most importantly properly rank) the elements contents? Using Google's "cache:" prefix followed by our pages url we can see the rendered cached page. The contents of the element in question are viewable and you can read the information inside. However, if you click the "Text-only version" link on the top-right of Google’s cached page, the element is missing and cannot be seen. The reason for this is because the element is initially styled with display:none and then JavaScript is used to display the text once some logic is applied. Doing a long-tail Google search for a few sentences from inside the element does find the page in the results, but I am not certain that is it being cached and ranked optimally... would updating the logic so that all the contents are not made visible by JavaScript improve our ranking or can we assume that since Google does return the page in its results that everything is proper? Thank you!0 -
ECWID How to fix Duplicate page content and external link issue
I am working on a site that has a HUGE number of duplicate pages due to ECWID ecommerce platform. The site is built with Joomla! How can I rectify this situation? The pages also show up as "external " links on crawls... Is it the ECWID platform? I have never worked on a site that uses this. Here is an example of a page with the issue (there are 6280 issues) URL: http://www.metroboltmi.com/shop-spare-parts?Itemid=218&option=com_rokecwid&view=ecwid&ecwid_category_id=3560081
Web Design | | Atlanta-SMO0 -
What site do you admire/like for its SEO - technical, content, whatever - and why?
I am gathering examples of great SEO'd sites and would appreciate your examples. The rationale can be anything - great SEO structure, great linking, solid content - you think stands out. Thank you!
Web Design | | josh-riley0 -
Duplicate content and blog/twitter feeds
Hi Mozzers, I have a question... I'm planning to add a blog summary/twitter feed throughout my website (onto every main content page) and then started worrying about duplicate content. What is best practice here? Let me know - thanks, Luke PS. I sat down and re: blog feed... thought that perhaps it would help if I fed different blog posts through to different pages (which I could then edit so I could add<a></a> text different from that in blog). Not sure about twitter.
Web Design | | McTaggart1 -
Content Stacking - CSS positioning
I was curious to know what everyone thinks about CSS positioning so that the spiders will read a optimal bulk of content first - before it reads the others. Say I have some Tab's set up for navigational purposes, where the content in the last tab is actually what I want the bots to see first. What would be the best practices for accomplishing something like this?
Web Design | | imageworks-2612900 -
Page Title or Search Friendly Urls?
We are currently auditing our website as part of our SEO strategy. One item which hascome up is the importance of search friendly urls against the search engine friendly page titles. Do url's or page titles carry more relevance than the other in search engines? Obviously the ideal would be to have both to maximise search impact but do either carry more importance. Thanks
Web Design | | bwfc770 -
How long does Google take to re-cache a site?
Specifically, I just redesigned my site. I'm reading Danny Dovers book, and learned about checking the cache version of the site to see what google is REALLY seeing . . . . . . which evidently is my old site. Obviously, my sites not going to make any real progress with SEO as long as the site is out of date. It says it last checked the site on 5/5 and I launched the site on 5/9. Obviously, it does not do these things immediately, but anyone have any ideas on how long it should take before google starts to show me some love?
Web Design | | damon12120