Hreflang and canonical for multi-language website
-
Hi all,
We're about to have a new website in different languages and locations, which will replace the existing one.
Lets say the domain name is example.com. the US version will be example.com/en-us/ and the UK version will be example.com/en-uk/. Some of the pages on both version share the same content. So in order to solve it, we're about to use hreflang on each page + a canonical tag which will always use the US address as canonical address.
My question is - since we are using canonical tag along with hreflang, is there a possibility that a user who is searching with Google.co.uk will get the canonical US address instead of the UK address? Or maybe the search engine will know to display the right localized address since (UK) i've been using hreflang? It is really important for me to know, because i'm afraid we will lose the high rankings that we have right now on google.co.uk.
Thanks in Advance
-
Thanks Lynnp for your answer, but unfortunately the suggestions given and documented with those previous Q&As are not valid anymore, because Google has since few months offered a new interpretation to the hreflang/rel="canonical" co-existence issue (read my answer).
-
If the hreflang is set up correctly, then the answer is NO.
hreflang and rel="canonical", as stated by Google itself, are two completely different kind of information.
- The first tells Google what URL to show depending on the language and location of users;
- The second tells Google if the URL it is crawling is identical to another one, which is referenced as href in the rel="canonical", therefore to consider it for indexing.
Check this post by David Sottimano, that is quite claryfing (and reports what Google really says now about this kind of situation)
When both annotations are used, we are practically saying this to Google (pardon me for the maybe poor metaphor):
Ok Google, I'm telling you that this URL - A - must be canonicalized to the URL B, so please don't count it as duplicated content. On the other hand, though, for me it is extremely important that you show URL A to the all English speaking users in Great Britain (Google.co.uk). Therefore, just for the situation don't filter out URL A.
Disclaimer: this is true in 99% of the cases, because we know also that the rel="canonical" is not a directive, but a strong hint we are giving to Google.
Because of this it is always a good idea - in the long term - to localize the content, even if American English and British English seems so similar (they aren't). Google has become smart enough to understand the different "flavors" a language may have in different territories.
-
Hi,
If the high rankings you have on .co.uk are for competitive keywords then I think you are wise to be concerned. Is the site originally from the US or what is influencing the decision to make the en-us version the default with the new site? Keep in mind also what the default example.com will be supporting, would that also be en-us (thereby rendering /en-us/ irrelevant)?
It used to be that using canonical together with hreflang was ok by google but had some odd side effects: If you canonical the uk version to the us version then certain uk searches could see the uk url but with title/meta/content from the us page. That can be ok depending on what your titles/content are like. If your us page title is 'my company USA' then that is probably not what you want uk searches seeing even if the link lands them on the uk page in the end. It also usually meant that the uk pages CONTENT itself was not searchable in google, so if the page for example had the only mention of a uk phone number then this number would not show up in google serps.
That being said, it seems that google has changed the guidance on using canonicals and hreflang together and is now suggesting only using canonicals within the same language/region set. Check here and the comments here for some more details. Soooo.... not sure if that helps answer your question much more!
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
-
URL has caps, but canonical does not. Now what?
Hi, Just started working with a site that has the occasional url with a capital, but then the url in the canonical as lower case. Neither, when entered in a browser, resolves to the other. It's a Shopify site. What do you think I should do?
Technical SEO | | 945010 -
Does Canonical Tag Syntax Matter?
Does anyone know definitively if the format of the canonical tag matters? Silly question I know. vs
Technical SEO | | Healio0 -
Can I canonical the same page?
I have a site where I have 500+ Page listing pages and I would like to rel=canonical them to the master page. Example: http://www.example.com//articles?p=18 OR http://www.example.com/articles?p=65 I plan on adding this to the section from of the page template so it goes to all pages - When I do this, I will also add the canonical to the page I am directing the canonical. Is this a bad thing? Or allowed?
Technical SEO | | JoshKimber0 -
Canonical tag problem
Hello I'm newbie here i dont know very well about seo but i would like to ask your help? I'm running report about my website and on report I dont have canonical tag on my products. But if i check from on page report link by link it shows that I have canonical tag. At the same time if i check my pages code i can see below canonical tag codes? Do we use canonical tags wrong? What can cause this different information? Could you please help me? Is it important to use canonical tag beginning or end? I'm using now trial version and trying to understand report is correct what is my mistakes. Thanks in advance My code is
Technical SEO | | FRUTIKO0 -
After I 301 redirect duplicate pages to my rel=canonical page, do I need to add any tags or code to the non canonical pages?
I have many duplicate pages. Some pages have 2-3 duplicates. Most of which have Uppercase and Lowercase paths (generated by Microsoft IIS). Does this implementation of 301 and rel=canonical suffice? Or is there more I could do to optimize the passing of duplicate page link juice to the canonical. THANK YOU!
Technical SEO | | PFTools0 -
Help Website Plumetting :(
Hi I have been smacked by the penguin/panda and traffic plumetted back in April/May. We are still trying to recover and am looking at all of the potential issues. I have since cleaned up the site as much as i can and attempted to remove as much duplicate content as possible which is automatically generated by Zencart. We add content regularly and have new product reviews everyday and all product page are kept fresh as they show the last 12 customers engraving details which change daily on popular items. Could someone give me some pointers as i am hitting my head against the wall and only seeing traffic drop all the time, it's soul destroying just how much work i am putting into this every day without any effect. Site is www.keepitpersonal.co.uk Kind Regards Andy
Technical SEO | | SmithyWhiffy0 -
Canonical tags
Hi there, I have just noticed that SEOmoz picked up some duplicates links that I would like to resolve but not sure how. For example, the "Finding work in the arts" article has two links: http://www.creative-choices.co.uk/develop-your-career/article/finding-work-in-the-arts http://www.creative-choices.co.uk/develop-your-career/article/finding-work-in-the-arts?utm_source=Website&utm_medium=Website&utm_content=Finding+work+in+the+arts&utm_campaign=Footer+Links Both links can be found on this page http://www.creative-choices.co.uk/industry-news-views/article/what-employers-are-looking-for (see attachment). Would automatically generated canonical tags by the CMS solve this issue? rmxiP
Technical SEO | | CreativeChoices0 -
Canonical tags and relative paths
Hi, I'm seeing a problem with Roger Bot crawling a clients site. In a campaign I am seeing you say that the canonical tag is pointing to a different URL. The tag is as follows:- /~/Standards-and....etc Google say:- relative paths are recognized as expected with the tag. Also, if you include a <base> link in your document, relative paths will resolve according to the base URL Is the issue with this, that there is a /~/, that there is no <base> link or just an issue with Roger? Best regards, Peter
Technical SEO | | peeveezee0