<rel canonical="">and Query Strings</rel>
-
How are you supposed to <rel canonical="" tag="">a page with a query string that has already been indexed? It's not like you're serving that page from a CMS where you have an original page with content to add to the head tag.</rel>
For example....
Original Page = http://www.example.com/about/products.php
Query String Page = http://www.example.com/about/products.php?src=FrontDoorBox
Would adding the <rel canonical="" tag="">to the original page, referencing itself, be the solution so that the next time the original page is crawled, the bot will know that the previously indexed URL with query string should actually be the "original"? That's the only solution I can come up with because there's no way to find the query string rendered page to tag with the canonical.....</rel>
-
The page being indexed already is not a factor. You want to add the tag to the primary page and all variant pages with parameters. The next time those pages are crawled, Google will see the canonical tag and adjust the URL accordingly.
Your question is difficult because the answer would depend on how your CMS is coded.
Generally there is a template which is used to create the pages. Your template would need to be modified using a conditional statement to provide the canonical tag for URLs with parameters. This would be your best solution.
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
-
Rel=canonical on pre-migration website
I have an e-commerce client that is migrating platforms. The current structure of their existing website has led to what I would believe to be mass duplicate content. They have something north of 150,000 indexed URLs. However, 143,000+ of these have query strings and the content is identical to pages without any query string. Even so, the site does pretty well from an organic stand point compared to many of its direct competitors. Here is my question: (1) I am assuming that I should go into WMT (Google/Bing) and tell both search engines to ignore query strings. (2) In a review of back links, it does appear that there is a mish mash of good incoming links both to the clean and the dirty URLs. Should I add a rel=canonical via a script to all the pages with query strings before we make our migration and allow the search engines some time to process? (3) I'm assuming I can continue to watch the indexation of the URLs, but should I also tell search engines to remove the URLs of the dirty URLs? (4) Should I do Fetch in WMT? And if so, what sequence should I do for 1-4. How long should I wait between doing the above and undertaking the migration?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ExploreConsulting0 -
"Hot Desk" type office space to establish addresses in multiple locations
Hello Mozzers, I'm noticing increasing numbers of clients' competitors getting physical addresses and phone numbers in multiple locations, no doubt partly for SEO purposes. These are little more than ghost presences (in hot desk style office space) and the phone numbers are simply diverted. Do such physical addresses put them at an SEO advantage (over and above those who don't have hot desk style space and location phone numbers). Or does Google weed out hot desk type office spaces where they can? Your thoughts/experience would be very welcome! Thanks in advance, Luke
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
How to structure links on a "Card" for maximum crawler-friendliness
My question is how to best structure the links on a "Card" while maintaining usability for touchscreens. I've attached a simple wireframe, but the "card" is a format you see a lot now on the web: it's about a "topic" and contains an image for the topic and some text. When you click the card it links to a page about the "topic". My question is how to best structure the card's html so google can most easily read it. I have two options: a) Make the elements of the card 2 separate links, one for the image and one for the text. Google would read this as follows. //image
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jcgoodrich
[](/target URL) //text
<a href=' target="" url'="">Topic</a href='> b) Make the entire "Card" a link which would cause Google to read it as follows: <a></a> <a>Bunch of div elements that includes anchor text and alt-image attributes above along with a fair amount of additional text.</a> <a></a> Holding UX aside, which of these options is better purely from a Google crawling perspective? Does doing (b) confuse the bot about what the target page is about? If one is clearly better, is it a dramatic difference? Thanks! PwcPRZK0 -
How should I react to my site being "attacked" by bad links?
Hello, We have never bought links or done manipulative linbuilding. Meanwhile, someone has recently (15th of March) pointed at the top 5 websites on my main keyword with lots of bad quality links. So far it has not affected my rankings at all. Actually, I think it will not affect them because I think it was not a massive enough attack. The particular page that has been attacked had about 100 root domains pointing it and now it went up to something like 400. All those were in one day. All of those links use the same anchor text: the keyword we're ranking for. With those extra 300 root domains pointing at us, we went from 600 rootdomain to 900 pointing at our domain as a whole. The page that was targetted by the attack is not the homepage. What I wanted to do was to basically do nothing since I think it won't affect our rankings in any ways but I wanted you guys' opinion. Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EndeR-0 -
Should we Use rel=canonical in ccTLDs websites
We have multilingual eCommerce websites with some content variations but majority of the content remains the same We have used rel=alternate hreflang on corresponding ccTLDs respective countries. for example on example.com -which is the oldest of these sites- we have used Now should we also use link rel="canonical" href="example.com" on all ccTLDs? What are the advantages and disadvantages of using it?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CyrilWilson0 -
Http://blogsearch.google.com/ping
Is there any reason why a website would submit all their content (videos, photo galleries, articles) to this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MargaritaS0 -
If google ignores links from "spammy" link directories ...
Then why does SEO moz have this list: http://www.seomoz.org/dp/seo-directory ?? Included in that list are some pretty spammy looking sites such as: <colgroup><col width="345"></colgroup>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | adriandg
| http://www.site-sift.com/ |
| http://www.2yi.net/ |
| http://www.sevenseek.com/ |
| http://greenstalk.com/ |
| http://anthonyparsons.com/ |
| http://www.rakcha.com/ |
| http://www.goguides.org/ |
| http://gosearchbusiness.com/ |
| http://funender.com/free_link_directory/ |
| http://www.joeant.com/ |
| http://www.browse8.com/ |
| http://linkopedia.com/ |
| http://kwika.org/ |
| http://tygo.com/ |
| http://netzoning.com/ |
| http://goongee.com/ |
| http://bigall.com/ |
| http://www.incrawler.com/ |
| http://rubberstamped.org/ |
| http://lookforth.com/ |
| http://worldsiteindex.com/ |
| http://linksgiving.com/ |
| http://azoos.com/ |
| http://www.uncoverthenet.com/ |
| http://ewilla.com/ |0 -
Has important is it to set "priority" and "frequency" in sitemaps?
Has anyone ever done any testing on setting "priority' and "frequency" in their sitemaps? What was the result? Does specifying priority or frequency help quite a bit?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline2
