I've copied a content from a government site as it is necessary. Should I add a canonical or just a reference link?
-
Thanks!
-
You may find this helpful - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy3_Rjc0Tso
I suppose you could get around it by creating it in an image or a way that Google bot wouldn't see is as duplicate content as much but its iffy.
Alternatively don't copy the content just reference it in a link then you don't have the content problem but the users can still see the content.
-
Then you'd want to avoid the canonical, but it's unlikely that the page will rank well if you have copied it from a reliable resource like a government website. Google tends to try and filter copies like this, although sometimes you see the same thing ranking over and over again on different sites because those duplicated resources are legitimately the only relevant results for a user's query. When Google does filter duplicate results, it will try to pick the most authoritative resource to rank, discarding the rest. In a case like this, it'll pick the government website 99.9% of the time and discard copies.
If you really want that page to rank, you'd also want to avoid linking to the original source as well, as linking was a good way of specifying the source before canonicalisation. I wouldn't say that it's a good idea, though - there's no point adding duplicate content that lacks canonicalisation to your website when you don't need to, even if the content is a good resource.
-
What if I still want the page to rank in Google since it's a resource though it's a duplicate content?
-
The link might be enough but I am not sure what a Googler would say to the question. They might advise you to add a canonical tag due to the entire page being a duplicate. Using the canonical certainly can't hurt your site at all, besides the fact that that page won't rank (which isn't an issue). The rest of the site remains totally unaffected.
-
Yes, I copied an entire page for a legitimate reason. Is it fine if I'll just add a link below the copied content for example "Original source: [url]"?
-
Depending on how extensive your quoting of the government content is, you might just be able to link, or you might be better off canonicalising. A simple quote on an otherwise unique page is not reason to canonicalise, just as if you had quoted from a newspaper website in an article about a subject. There is no way you'd need to canonicalise your own article to that subject.
An entire page, lifted and republished for legitimate reasons, you could canonicalise to avoid any duplication confusion (even though a link was the proper way to go about identifying the original source of the content in the past).
-
Both do the same really with the exception of the user can see one more than the other. I would recommend the canonical which should help avoid duplicate content issues as the content is already there and I don't foresee the user needing a link.
in short- canonical it
more info - https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139066?hl=en
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
-
Any Website SEO Benefits from SAAS Linked Content?
An installed software application has a help section for users, and that help content is housed on the software company website. Would the links from the software application to the company website benefit the websites SEO efforts? Or, would no referring URL mean no SEO value?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sysprousa1
Thanks!0 -
Could duplicate (copied) content actually hurt a domain?
Hi 🙂 I run a small wordpress multisite network where the main site which is an informative portal about the Langhe region in Italy, and the subsites are websites of small local companies in the tourism and wine/food niche. As an additional service for those who build a website with us, I was thinking about giving them the possibility to use some ouf our portal's content (such as sights, events etc) on their website, in an automatic way. Not as an "SEO" plus, but more as a service for their current users/visitors base: so if you have a B&B you can have on your site an "events" section with curated content, or a section about thing to see (monuments, parks, museums, etc) in that area, so that your visitors can enjoy reading some content about the territory. I was wondering if, apart from NOT being benefical, it would be BAD from an SEO point of view... ie: if they could be actually penlized by google. Thanks 🙂 Best
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Enrico_Cassinelli0 -
Weird behavior with site's rankings
I have a problem with my site's rankings.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Mcurius
I rank for higher difficulty (but lower search volume) keywords , but my site gets pushed back for lower difficulty, higher volume keywords, which literally pisses me off. I thought very seriously to start new with a new domain name, cause what ever i do seems that is not working. I will admit that in past (2-3 years ago) i used some of those "seo packages" i had found, but those links which were like no more than 50, are all deleted now, and the domains are disavowed.
The only thing i can think of, is that some how my site got flagged as suspicious or something like that in google. Like 1 month ago, i wrote an article about a topic related with my niche, around a keyword that has difficulty 41%. The search term in 1st page has high authority domains, including a wikipedia page, and i currently rank in the 3rd place. In the other had, i would expect to rank easily for a keyword difficulty of 30-35% but is happening the exact opposite.The pages i try to rank, are not spammy, are checked with moz tools, and also with canirank spam filters. All is good and green. Plus the content of those pages i try to rank have a Content Relevancy Score which varies from 98% to 100%... Your opinion would be very helpful, thank you.0 -
Hreflang tag on links to alternate language site
Hey everyone! In the interest of trying to be brief, here's the situation in my favorite form of communication, bullet points! Client has two sites; one is in English and one is in Japanese Each site is a separate URL, no sub-domains or sub-pages Each main page on the English version of the site has a link to the homepage of the Japanese site Site has decent rankings overall, with room for improvement from page 2 to page 1 No Hreflang tags currently used in links to the Japanese version from the English version Given that the site isn't really suffering for most rankings, would this be helpful to implement on the English version? Ideally, I'd like each link to be updated to the corresponding subject matter of the Japanese, but in the interim it seems like identifying to Google that the link on the other side is a different language might be helpful to both the user and to maybe help those rankings on page two creep a little higher to page one. Thanks for reading, I appreciate your time.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Etna0 -
Google penalized site--307/302 redirect to new site-- Via intermediate link—New Site Ranking Gone..?
Hi, I have a site that google had placed a manual link penalty on, let’s call this our
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Robdob2013
company site. We tried and tried to get the penalty removed, and finally gave up and purchased another name. It was our understanding that we could safely use either a 302 or 307 temporary redirect in order to redirect people from our old domain to our new one.. We put this into place several months and everything seemed to be going along well. Several days ago I noticed that our root domain name had dropped for our selected keyword from position 9 to position 65. Upon looking into our GWT under “Links to Your site” , I have found many, many, many links which were pointed to our old google penalized domain name to our new root domain name each of this links had a sub heading “Via this intermediate link -> Our Old Domain Google Penalized Domain Name” In light of all of this going on, I have removed the 307/302 redirect, have brought the
old penalized site back which now consists of a basic “we’ve moved page” which is linked to our new site using a rel=’nofollow’ I am hoping that -1- Our new domain has probably not received a manual penalty and is most likely now
received some sort of algorithmic penalty, and that as these “intermediate links” will soon disappear because I’m no longer doing the 302/307 from the old sight to the new. Do you think this is the case now or that I now have a new manual penalty place on the new
domain name.. I would very much appreciate any comments and/or suggestions as to what I should or can do to get this fixed. I need to still keep the old domain name as this address has already been printed on business cards many, many years ago.. Also on a side note some of the sub pages of the new root domain are still ranking very
well, it’s only the root domain that is now racking awfully.. Thanks,0 -
Sitewide Header Link to Sister Site
Hi, I've just added a sitewide header image link (60 pages) from our general company site pointing to homepage of another brand site of a product that we also own (which focuses in depth on that one brand). I haven't put a nofollow on it as it's just info for those who'd like to reach our other site. Should I expect anything negative out of this for either site? Could it seem like it picked up 60 image links suddenly and raise a flag?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | emerald0 -
Google is not Indicating any Links to my site
We built a new store on another ccTLD and linked to it from some of our other domains in a few locations. I am noticing that with the Google operator command "links:" we are seeing nothing linking to our site anywhere. Some things to clarify: These are not no-follow links These pages linking to our new domain are indexed The pages being linked to on our new domain are indexed This is not a flash site or heavy in JavaScript The links existed the day the site was launched so when the new pages were crawled they existed. "Site:" command in Google shows me that my new site is indexed. What could potentially be causing this? I am trying to get these newer ccTLD's to begin ranking and I understand that I need to get links going to these pages since they are fairly new (2.5 months) so I can outrank the .com in the SE's in those locales. (Like Google.co.uk)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DRSearchEngOpt0 -
Can't find my site on Bing, since ages
Hi Guys, Well, the problem seems normal but I guess it's not. I have tried many things, and nothing changed it, now I give it last try... ask so maybe you will help me. The problem is.. I can't find my site nowhere in Bing, I mean nowhere by not in first 20 pages for my keywords "beauty tips" and the site is: http://www.beauty-tips.net/. In my opinion it should be pretty high... maybe it's too high so I can't see it ;). I never had special problems with Bing, was easier to be there "somewhere" than in google, but with this one is totally opposite. Any ideas? Thanks for your time!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Luke220