Transferring link juice from a canonical URL to an SEO landing page.
-
I have URLs that I use for SEM ads in Google. The content on those pages is duplicate (affiliate). Those pages also have dynamic parameters which caused lots of duplicate content pages to be indexed. I have put a canonical tag on the Parameter pages to consolidate everything to the canonical URL. Both the canonical URL and the Parameter URLs have links pointing to them. So as it stands now, my canonical URL is still indexed, but the parameter URLs are not. The canonical page is still made up of affiliate (duplicate) content though.
I want to create an equivalent SEO landing page with unique content. But I'd like to do two things 1) remove the canonical URL from the index - due to duplicate affiliate content, and 2) transfer the link juice from the canonical URL over to the SEO URL. I'm thinking of adding a meta NoIndex, follow tag to the canonical tag - and internally linking to the new SEO landing page. Does this strategy work? I don't want to lose the link juice on the canonical URL by adding a meta noindex tag to it.
Thanks in advance for your advice.
Rob
-
Yes, I am actually one of those third party affiliates, so I need to remove those pages from the index as currently there are 61,000 pages indexed (all duplicate, affiliate content).
As I slowly build SEO pages I plan to index my SEO side of the site bit by bit. The strange thing is that teh SEM pages do have links, they are coming organically just from being in the publics eye. In a way its a nice problem to have, as I'm hoping to capture the juice and funnel it over to the new SEO pages. make sense?
Best,
Rob
PS - i'm up for coffee anytime. I'll let you know when I'm in town.
-
This is a little hard to talk through without seeing it, but I think I see where you're coming from. You have content on the current canonical page that third-party affiliates are also using on their sites - is that right?
Is the content different enough that you can't just canonical the SEM pages over to the organic page? In any case, I think your solution is fine as long as the organic page is the page that can be found through navigation. If the SEM pages don't have external links (I don't know why they would) it's really not a big deal - even adding links is probably unnecessary because it's not going to help much from an orphaned SEM page with no link equity.
-
Sure, let's get a coffee! Feel free to PM me when you get here.
-
Carson,
BTW - thanks for answering my question - that was a complicated question, and it took some thought on your part to answer it. I appreciate it.
Also - I see you are in the Salt Lake City area. I am moving to SLC in the next few months. Currently I'm traveling there for business one week per month. It would be neat to meet you in person. Let me know if you are interested, and maybe we can connect in person one of these days.
Rob
-
Carson,
Thanks for your response. I had been planning to no-index the canonical page because the canonical version has affiliate (duplicate) content in it. My new SEO page has unique content, and is different than the other SEM pages - both the root canonical page, as well as its parameter URL's. So as it stands now, I am consolidating the SEM pages (parameter pages) using a canonical - pointing to the root SEM URL (which also has affiliate content). Then I am no-indexing, follow that page - and linking to the new SEO page using a link in the breadcrumbs to pass the link juice.
If I don't do this, my only alternative is to try and make the SEM page be the same as the SEO page and canonicalize the SEO page - but that will handcuff me quite a bit as far as the SEO page is concerned as I would be limited in design, etc. Does that make sense?
Thanks for your interest and response.
Rob
-
Sorry this took a while to address! I would definitely not noindex a URL that is canonical. Rather, make the organic version (the version that can be reached by navigating the site - don't try to rank with a very similar page that floats outside the standard site structure) the canonical URL. It's fairly standard practice to noindex, follow PPC landing pages, and it works fine. Unless the PPC landing pages are somehow being linked to, there's not really any need to add canonical tags or internal links.
If the PPC pages do have links, it's usually because they've found their way into the primary structure at some point. In these cases you can 301 consolidate the pages or use canonical tags for exact duplicates. Again, it doesn't really matter except in the very rare cases where PPC pages have valuable external linking domains.
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
-
Keywords going to Subdomain instead of targeted page(general landing page)
Why are some of my keywords going to subdomains instead of the more general/targeted landing page. For example, on my ecommerce website, the keyword 'tempurpedic' is directing to the subdomain URL of a specific tempurpedic product page instead of the general landing page. The product has a page authority of 15 and the Tempurpedic landing pages with all the products has an authority of 31. I have also noticed that my 'furniture stores in houston' keyword directs to my "occasional tables" URL! instead of a the much more targeted homepage. Is there something I am missing here?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nat88han0 -
When to consolidate and when to bid Link Juice farewell?
Greetings all! I've got a couple of questions about when and if it's alright to let accumulated Link Juice (LJ) slip into the depths of oblivion. I arrived 4 years late to the ticketing website that I work for (www.charged.fm), and found the website in a certain state of disarray. For the past 6 months I've been trying to wrap my head around SEO and our 750k+ page site, and lately we've been making good progress cleaning things up and redesigning. I'm at a loss, though, as to what to do with some pages. Example: The blog director has been using hash tags for years now that created new pages for each different #, which created a lot of instances of 2 [bytag] pages for 2 different hash tags that had the same article on them. http://www.charged.fm/blog/bytag/31631/steve-masiello-usf
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | keL.A.xT.o
http://www.charged.fm/blog/bytag/31632/steve-masiello-south-florida We've added 'noindex, follow' to this directory (which is the correct solutions, riiight??), but now I'm wondering if some of these pages should be 301'd to more relevant sections of the site, or back to the blog homepage. I know this could be bad for UI, but I don't believe that they're frequently used pages and don't want to let these PA 15 pages go to waste. Any thoughts on this? Example 2: A similar situation is that they used 302s to redirect to search results pages instead of using category pages. So now there are hundreds, if not thousands, of search results pages that have a PA of 15 or more. http://www.charged.fm/search/results/music-tickets We're working on restructuring the site and removing the 302s, but I'm wondering if it's necessary to 301 all of the search results pages to the new category pages like so: http://www.charged.fm/search/results/music-tickets >>> http://www.charged.fm/concert-tickets This would require the programmer to create new search/results pages in order to 301 the old ranking ones, correct? Should I put this in queue for him or just leave the search results pages with 'noindex, follow' and let the PA 15 go to waste? There are many other instances like this like a Login page with PA 20, and I just can't decide if everything should be redirected or what to leave as dust in the wind. Because all we are is dust in the wind ; ) Thanks for any help, Luke0 -
Backlinking from a Canonical Page to the Non-Canonical Doman - Wrong Signals?
Hi Mozzers, Let's say you have www.mysite.com/page, which is a duplicate of www.yoursite.com/page. www.yousite.com/page has a rel canonical link identifying www.mysite.com/page as the original source. www.mysite.com/page has a followed backlink going towards www.yousite.com/home-page. mysite.com has a DA of 44
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Travis-W
yoursite.com has a DA of 33 Google has chosen to index www.yoursite.com/page instead of www.mysite.com/page. Is the followed backlink responsible for the wrong page being indexed? Thanks!0 -
A Landing Page Goldmine?
If anyone can take a minute to help me out with this, I'd really love to get some expert opinions. I can produce really strong content like a machine and, over the years, I've had tons of pages on my website that had links pointing to them (didn't know about SEO then) deleted and now I'm starting to dig them up. I have dozens with a moz rank higher than 25. My question is what do I do with these urls, should I rewrite them and get the innerlinking strength or should I do a 301 redirect to a similar page? Considering the incoming links and individual seomoz pr rank of these pages , am I sitting on something valuable?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ksundheim10 -
Link + noindex vs canonical--which is better?
In this article http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=66359 google mentions if you syndicate content, you should include a link and, ideally noindex, the content, if possible. I'm wondering why google doesn't mention including a canonical instead the link + noindex? Is one better than the other? Any ideas?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
Duplicate internal links on page, any benefit to nofollow
Link spam is naturally a hot topic amongst SEO's, particularly post Penguin. While digging around forums etc, I watched a video blog from Matt Cutts posted a while ago that suggests that Google only pays attention to the first instance of a link on the page As most websites will have multiple instances of a links (header, footer and body text), is it beneficial to nofollow the additional instances of the link? Also as the first instance of a link will in most cases be within the header nav, does that then make the content link text critical or can good on page optimisation be pulled from the title attribute? I would appreciate the experiences and thoughts Mozzers thoughts on this thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JustinTaylor880 -
Multiple URLs for the same page
I am working with a client and recently discovered that they have several URLs that go to the same page. http://www.maps.com/FunFacts.aspx
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | WebMarketingandDesign
http://www.maps.com/funfacts.aspx
http://www.maps.com/FunFacts.aspx?nav=FF
http://www.maps.com/FunFacts.aspx?nav=FS
http://www.maps.com/funfacts.aspx?nav=FF
http://www.maps.com/funfacts.aspx?nav=ffhttp://www.maps.com/FunFacts.aspx?nav=MShttp://www.maps.com/funfacts.aspx?nav=
http://www.maps.com/FunFacts.aspx?nav=FF#
http://www.maps.com/FunFacts
http://www.maps.com/funfacts.aspx?.nav=FF I am afraid this is happening all over the site. So, my question is: Is this hurting the SEO and how? If so what is the best way to go about fixing this problem? Thanks for your help!0 -
In order to improve SEO with silos'urls, should i move my posts from blog directory to pages'directories ?
Now, my website is like this: myurl.com/blog/category1/mypost.html myurl.com/category1/mypage.html So I use silos urls. I'd like to improve my ranking a little bit more. Is it better to change my urls like this: myurl.com/category1/blog/mypost.html or maybe myurl.com/category1/mypost.html myurl.com/category1/mypage.html Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Max840