What's my best strategy for Duplicate Content if only www pages are indexed?
-
The MOZ crawl report for my site shows duplicate content with both www and non-www pages on the site. (Only the www are indexed by Google, however.) Do I still need to use a 301 redirect - even if the non-www are not indexed? Is rel=canonical less preferable, as usual?
Facts:
- the site is built using asp.net
- the homepage has multiple versions which use 'meta refresh' tags to point to 'default.asp'.
- most links already point to www
Current Strategy:
- set the preferred domain to 'www' in Google's Webmaster Tools.
- set the Wordpress blog (which sits in a /blog subdirectory) with rel="canonical" to point to the www version.
- Ask programmer to add 301 redirects from the non-www pages to the www pages.
- Ask programmer to use 301 redirects as opposed to meta refresh tags & point all homepage versions to www.site.org.
Does this strategy make the most sense? (Especially considering the non-indexed but existent non-www pages.)
Thanks!!
-
Very informative - thank you! It seems when I think I have a relatively firm grip on SEO, I stumble upon something new - like the dangerous potential for an infinite loop in a 301 redirect in IIS. (That was Chinese to me two days ago;))
Your response solved my concerns - hopefully it will help somebody else when they face the same problem.
-
Well the reason Google has picked the www version as it's preferred version automatically is most likely because of all the links you mentioned that were already pointing to that iteration of your domain. Google can figure this out on their own. That said, it still sees both of the sites (non www and www) as duplicates of each other. Best practice is to 301 one to another.
I've waged this war with a programmer before so I know how it goes. The one I dealt with didn't think there was any reason and told me all websites work that way. So I asked him to go to http://google.com and tell me how it resolves. Repeat that step with every major brand you can think of until he/she gets the point and that might help you.
They should be able to 301 this one time, no matter whether they're using an Apache or IIS server. This should be a quick fix. If they're unsure how to do it, have them Google "IIS 301 redirects" if it's a Windows server or "htaccess 301" if it's a Linux/Apache server.
-
Thanks for easing my mind Jesse! One thing still confuses me - the fact that the non-www pages are not indexed. They are not disallowed in robots.txt, there are no rel=canonical tags (except for pages in the blog subdirectory), they are not meta-refreshed, and obviously not 301 redirected. Could it be the doing of a sitemap (though I cant find one)? Or did Google simply decide all the www pages were more relevant? Am I missing something here? I don't want to ask the programmer to add a ton of 301 redirects (which I did) only to get a 'DUH!' response;)
FYI - site is asp.net - not sure if that matters, except when they redirect homepage to avoid creating infinite loop. (right?)
Thanks again!
-
This is an incredibly easy topic to address because you've already laid out exactly what needs to happen.
In other words, yes! That strategy is exactly the way you should go.
Good job and good luck!
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
-
Duplicate content issues with file download links (diff. versions of a downloadable application)
I'm a little unsure how canonicalisation works with this case. 🙂 We have very regular updates to the application which is available as a download on our site. Obviously, with every update the version number of the file being downloaded changes; and along with it, the URL parameter included when people click the 'Download' button on our site. e.g. mysite.com/download/download.php?f=myapp.1.0.1.exe mysite.com/download/download.php?f=myapp.1.0.2.exe mysite.com/download/download.php?f=myapp.1.0.3.exe, etc In the Moz Site Crawl report all of these links are registering as Duplicate Content. There's no content per se on these pages, all they do is trigger a download of the specified file from our servers. Two questions: Are these links actually hurting our ranking/authority/etc? Would adding a canonical tag to the head of mysite.com/download/download.php solve the crawl issues? Would this catch all of the download.php URLs? i.e. Thanks! Jon
Moz Pro | | jonmc
(not super up on php, btw. So if I'm saying something completely bogus here...be kind 😉 )0 -
Duplicate Content/Missing Meta Description | Pages DO NOT EXISIT!
Hello all, For the last few months, Moz has been showing us that our site has roughly 2,000 duplicate content errors. Pages that were actually duplicate content, I took care of accordingly using best practice (301 redirects, canonicalization,etc.). Still remaining after these fixes were errors showing for pages that we have never created. Our homepage is www.primepay.com. An example of pages that are being shown as duplicate content is http://primepay.com/blog/%5BLink%20to%20-%20http:/www.primepay.com/en/payrollservices/payroll/payroll/payroll/online-payroll with a referring page of http://primepay.com/blog/%5BLink%20to%20-%20http:/www.primepay.com/en/payrollservices/payroll/payroll/online-payroll. Some of these are even now showing up as 403 and 404 errors. The only real page on our site within that URL strand is primepay.com/payroll or primepay.com/payroll/online-payroll. Therefore, I am not sure where Moz is getting these pages from. Another issue we are having in relation to duplicate content is that moz is showing old campaign url’s tacked on to our blog page i.e. http://primepay.com/blog?title=&page=2&utm_source=blog&utm_medium=blogCTA&utm_campaign=IRSblogpost&qt-blog_tabs=1. As of this morning, our duplicate content went from 2,000 to 18,000. I exported all of our crawl diagnostics data and looked to see what the referring pages were, and even they are not pages that we have created. When you click on these links, they take you to a random point in time from the homepage of our blog; some dating back to 2010. I checked our crawl stats in both Google and Bing’s Webmaster tool, and there are no duplicate content or 400 level errors being reporting from their crawl. My team is truly at a loss with trying to resolve this issue and any help with this matter would be greatly appreciated.
Moz Pro | | PrimePay0 -
Website Issues - Duplicate Content
Hello, I'm fairly new to using Moz and I logged on this morning to find Issues have been found in one of the websites - 22 High Priority and 44 Medium. I know it's due to duplicate content in the blog, but i can't figure out what is duplicated? I've only recently come on board this website so I don't know if the content has been plagiarised or what? The link to the site is here: delacyspa.co.uk Any help would be appreciated. Thanks zFxQmmd
Moz Pro | | Cowbang0 -
Is The Number of Duplicate Pages reduced after adding canonical ref to the dupe versions ?
Hi Is the number of duplicate pages reported in a dupe page content error report reduced on subsequent crawls, if you have resolved the dupe content problem via adding the canonical tag to duplicate versions (referring the original page). Like it would if you were solving the problem via a 301 redirect (i think/presume) ? Cheers Dan
Moz Pro | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
Why do I see a duplicate content errors when rel="canonical" tag is present
I was reviewing my first Moz crawler report and noticed the crawler returned a bunch of duplicate page content errors. The recommendations to correct this issue are to either put a 301 redirect on the duplicate URL or use the rel="canonical" tag so Google knows which URL I view as the most important and the one that should appear in the search results. However, after poking around the source code I noticed all of the pages that are returning duplicate content in the eyes of the Moz crawler already have the rel="canonical" tag. Does the Moz crawler simply not catch whether that tag is being used? If I have that tag in place, is there anything else I need to do in order to get that error to stop showing up in the Moz crawler report?
Moz Pro | | shinolamoz0 -
Why don't Google+ URL's work in OSE?
Is there any reason why Google+ URLs does not work in OSE? Is it just that it is a secure URL or is there something bigger there? Why? Be cool to determine every website the person has been published on; especially if it is rel="author" verified. Jeff
Moz Pro | | WebBizIdeas1 -
Keywords Best Practices for On-Page Optimization
Hi guys, we've successfully optimized our home page such that it receives a Grade A for 3 completely different, high traffic keywords. Looking forward to seeing the results! The keywords in question were identified by using the monthly searches reported from the Google Keyword Tool. For one of the keywords, the Google Keyword Tool differentiates between what I thought would be seen as being the same. For example, let's say Google reports these three keywords as high traffic keywords: tea cup
Moz Pro | | yacpro13
tea cups
the tea cup Using the On-Page Report Card, we get a Grade A for 'tea cup', but we get an F for the other 2 terms! I thought Google searches didn't really care about the plural form or adding the word 'the' in front. How should we interpret the result from the On-Page Report Card for the plural form of the keyword and with the word 'the' added in front? Would you track all 3 instances of the keyword independtly in your campaign, or would you just track 'tea cup'? Thanks!0 -
Solving duplicate content errors for what is effectively the same page.
Hello,
Moz Pro | | jcarter
I am trying out your SEOMOZ and I quite like it. I've managed to remove most of the errors on my site however I'm not sure how to get round this last one. If you look at my errors you will see most of them revolve around things like this: http://www.containerpadlocks.co.uk/categories/32/dead-locks
http://www.containerpadlocks.co.uk/categories/32/dead-locks?PageSize=9999 These are essentially the same pages because the category for Dead Locks does not contain enough products to view over more than one resulting in the fact that when I say 'View all products' on my webpage, the results are the same. This functionality works with categories with more than the 20 per page limit. My question is, should I be either: Removing the link to 'show all products' (which adds the PageSize query string value) if no more products will be shown. Or putting a no-index meta tag on the page? Or some other action entirely? Looking forward to your reply and you showing how effective Pro is. Many Thanks,
James Carter0