Canonical nightmare! Help!
-
Hi all, I really hope someone can help, I'm new to Moz and think I've done something really silly.
Last night I changed some settings in Magento for how it handles Category paths and Canonicals to those that most SEO people recommend. Everything looked fine and products that had 4 URL's all seemed now to have only one.
I then tried the dropdown menu on iOS and it just didn't work (worked fine on PC). In a panic I changed the settings back, cleared cache etc...
Now I try to grade a page in Moz and I'm scoring an F on every one, critical errors everywhere! Top of the list is that it's returning HTTP code 200.
Has anyone heard of navigation that can be broken on only iOS or can anyone shed any light on how the canonical changes could have affected navigation?
Thanks, any help or suggestions really welcome.
-
Yeah, a status code of 200 is generally a good thing. Could you direct message me through the site and tell me which campaign you're seeing the errors on. I can log in and try to take a deeper look.
-
JM67,
Mike is probably on to something. 200 status is usually followed by OK which means you are good to go.
I would suspect that you may have a different issue when it comes to MOZ page rank. When you go from a good page rank to an F rank It usually means your are somehow linking the wrong Keyword to the page. So in your case check for something as simple as having "HTTPS" vs "HTTP" or www version vs non www. That makes all the difference.
Allen
-
I'd have to assume the changes in Magento broke your site because adding Re="canonical" tags wouldn't have done anything like what you're describing and with such intense speed considering you did this the other night.
Also a 200 HTTP Status is the Response Code for OK... which is what live and functioning pages should return.
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 building quality links on internal pages help us to improve DA?
Dear expert,
Moz Bar | | jhfdbeaob
I hope that you all are fine 🙂
Today, I am very confused about improving DA of my client website. For example: He has a domain www.abc.com
and he wants me to build a backlinks on different internal pages like
www.abc.com/service-1
www.abc.com/service-2
www.abc.com/service-3 If i build high quality links on internal pages (service pages) rather than building links on main domain (home page). Does the Domain Authority will increase
OR
I have to build links on Main page to boost the DA I am hoping a positive reply from your side Thanks1 -
Can Moz Keyword Explorer help target keywords for Google Images results?
I'm wondering if I can use Keyword Explorer (or maybe another tool?) to target keywords for image rankings. I'd like to play around with optimizing images so that they appear in search results and thus provide traffic - but wasn't sure the best way to track that kind of progress. My ultimate goal is to analyze the difficulty of ranking for a certain keyword via Google images. (I do know to optimize alt tag/title tag/place in relevant article etc, but wanted to know if I could research the difficulty). Any help is much appreciated. Thanks!
Moz Bar | | naturalsociety0 -
Page Grader states "includes Canonical Tag" but it's not in the page source at all
I've ran it multiple times and changed other things it picked up on so not sure where it's getting the canonical tag is included even though it isn't?
Moz Bar | | Wana-Ryd0 -
Spam Score Help Needed!
Hi guys, Basically, long story short our site currently has a spam score of 5%, which is heading into dangerous territory. We have been looking into why this might be and the more we've looked into it the more stumped we've become. We compared our inbound links to our competitors, who's spam score currently stands at just 1%, and found that we actually had a smaller proportion of spammy inbound links compared to theirs - and yet our score is 5x higher. We have looked into disavowal, but this seems like a high-risk venture and something of a last resort so we'd rather see if there's anything else we can do about this before we press the button. Are there any other factors we need to look in to aside from inbound links and domains? Could it be something to do with our site architecture? For example we have a very high number of internal links (102,011, 94.1% are followed) compared to our competitors. This could qualify us as a 'large' site, and when paired with the fact that we only have 640 inbound links could be a big red flag to Google? Any help you'd be willing to provide us on this would be much appreciated!
Moz Bar | | rawdog0 -
What are the best tools to help analyse on page optimisation for pages on development server and not currently live
currently using seo quake and moz tool bar but wondered if there is a better suggestion that will look at pages that are only accessible on the internal network on development server. Very restricted in what can be installed
Moz Bar | | Dan-Moz0 -
Suggestion for Improving the Crawl Report on Canonicals
This came up in the answer to a question I gave here http://moz.com/community/q/canonicals-in-crawling-reports#reply_222623 Wanted to post here to put it in as a suggestion on how to improve the Moz Crawl reports Currently, the report shows FALSE if there is no canonical link on a page and TRUE if there is. IF you get a TRUE response, this shows up as a warning in your report. I currently use Canonical to Self on almost all my pages to help with some indexing issues. I currently use the EXACT function in excel to create a formula to see if my canonical link matches the URL of the page (as this is what I want it to do). I can then know that the canonical is implemented properly, or if I need to manually check pages to make sure the canonical that points to another page is correct. I would like to suggest that the Moz crawl tool does this. It can show FALSE is the canonical is missing, TRUE if the canonical is present and SELF if the canonical points to the URL of the page it is on. I think for the most part this would be much more actionable information. I would even suggest that TRUE would need to be more of a high priority alert, and SELF can't do any damage, so I would leave that info in the CSV but not have that as a warning in the web interface. Thanks for listening!
Moz Bar | | CleverPhD0 -
"Sorry! We weren't able to find that page when we crawled your site." Please help!
Can someone please explain whey I am getting this error for this link "http://lensoutloud.com/san-antonio-real-estate-photography/" when I attempt to perform an on page SEO grading? The link is indexed and ranking very well but for some reason Moz says it can't find the page when it crawled my site. This has also happened when I attempt to grade other pages on my site. Thanks in advance!
Moz Bar | | AndreGant0 -
Moz reporting appropriate Canonical tag usage but no canonical tag on page !?
I take it this means that the page in question has been referenced via a different pages canonical tag but that the page in question itself does not have a self referencing canonical tag (and that it should do) cheers dan
Moz Bar | | Dan-Lawrence0