Canconical tag on site with multiple URL links but only one set of pages
-
We have a site www.mezfloor.com which has a number of Url's pointing at one site. As the url's have been in use for many years there are links from many sources include good old fashioned hard copy advertising. We have now decided that it would be better to try to start porting all sources to the .co.uk version and get that listing as the prime/master site.
A couple of days ago I went through and used canonical tags on all the pages thinking that would set the priority and that would also strengthen the page in terms of trust due to the reduced duplication. However when I went to scan the site in MOZ the warning that the page redirects came up and I am beginning to think that I need to remove all these canonical tags so that search engines do not get into a confused spiral where we loose the little page rank we have.
Is there a way that I can redirect everything except the target URL without setting up a separate master site just for all the other pages to point at.
-
Yes, it is good when there is a clear Google guideline to follow. I'm happy for your quick win!
-
Thanks
I am pleased I do not have to go through the whole site again and even more pleased as I have a number of other sites to work on.These could certainly do with a bit of a boost and this is a quick win.
-
So you want to put a canonical of www.b.co.uk/index.html on a page that can be reached via www.b.co.uk/index.html and you are worried that it will become a loop?
Don't worry. Google specifically thought about the possibility that people might use self-referential canonicals (SEO plugins do it all the time) and engineered it so that this does not cause a loop. (See Matt Cutts on the topic.)
I myself inherited some ugly urls for which I made nice user-friendly aliases and I tagged those pages with the friendly canonical. There were no problems and the pages started doing much better. (In my case it was not cross-domain, but cross-domain canonicals are supposedly supported and in fact I have succesfully used them in other situations.)
-
Hi thanks for the response
The issue is we have one set of pages on a server which is addressed through several different url's.
I never got involved in the server side of things so I do not know if that was by redirects at the route URL. Just maybe I am trying to add canonical links that just are not required.
If I have www.a.co.uk/index.html, www.a.com/index.html, www.b.co.uk/index.html and want them all to point to www.b.co.uk/index.html. As index.html is on the server once then my thought was that I should have a canonical link to that page from within that page with the www.b.co.uk/index.html as the route. This may be right or wrong but there is the risk that a spider stops when it gets to the link and goes to the start of the same page, again and again in a loop.
You are of course right that the Google bot should be OK with this but the Moz bot stopped in its tracks and asked if I wanted the page indexed so I had to do this manually.
Gut feel says I should remove the links for now but need to understand what we did server side. Gut feel maybe wrong and I would prefer to do the right thing!
-
Okay you lost me a little but let me see If I can help.
First off the canonical tag - Its fantastic for duplicate content (even across other sites) now so good if you don't have duplicate content.
301's - It's very similar to above can work well with duplicate content but not essential. Now you can 301 a few pages into one page so if a user types a URL in (or even has it as a bookmark etc.) the will land on the page you want. its normally a good idea to 301 into similar pages to you don't get users thinking they are going to buy (e.g.) a pair of boots and land on a page about t-shirts.
Google getting lost - Don't worry about Google getting lost, if a user can get around so can Google, plan plan and plan again if you plan it all out (you can even draw flow diagrams) so you know where its all going to and from until you are happy. You can also get someone who doesn't know your site to test it see if they get lost.
Hope that background helps a bit, you lost me here-
"Is there a way that I can redirect everything except the target URL without setting up a separate master site just for all the other pages to point at."
Why can't you redirect all your pages to the target URL ?
One helpful tool I recommend is screaming frog it can help you pick up redirects 404 etc.
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
-
Should I just have links on my home page or intro to articles
Hi, i am having problems optimizing my home page for the words, lifestyle magazine, online magazine and lifestyle news. my site is here www.in2town.co.uk I am just wondering if i have to much content on the page for google to understand that it is a lifestyle magazine. I am wondering if i should just have the links on the page and no introduction to the articles which i have seen here with a site http://www.femalefirst.co.uk and i am wondering how sites like this are ranking better than ours when they have hardly any content on their home page http://www.nelifestyle.co.uk/
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-184886
http://www.lifestyle.org/
http://www.internationallifestylemagazine.com/ any advice would be most welcome0 -
Webmaster Tools Links To Your Site
I logged onto webmaster tools today for my site and the section 'Links to Your Site' is showing no data. Also if I search using link:babskibaby.com it only shows 1 link. My site had been showing 500+ links previously. Does anyone know why this is?
Technical SEO | | babski0 -
Too Many On-Page Links on a Blog
I have a question about the number of on-page links on a page and the implications on how we're viewed by search engines. After SEOmoz crawls our website, we consistently get notifications that some of our pages have "Too Many On-Page Links." These are always limited to pages on our blog, and largely a function of our tag cloud (~ 30 links) plus categories (10 links) plus popular posts (5 links). These all display on every blog post in the sidebar. How significant a problem is this? And, if you think it is a significant problem, what would you suggest to remedy the problem? Here's a link to our blog in case it helps: http://wiredimpact.com/blog/ The above page currently is listed as having 138 links. Any advice is much appreciated. Thanks so much. David
Technical SEO | | WiredImpact0 -
Splitting Page Authority with two URLs for the same page.
Hello guys, My website is currently holding two different URLs for the same page and I am under the impression such set up is dividing my Page Authority and Link Juice. We currently have the following page with both URLs below: www.wbresearch.com/soldiertechnologyusa/home.aspx
Technical SEO | | JoaoPdaCosta-WBR
www.wbresearch.com/soldiertechnologyusa/ Analysing the page authority and backlinks I identified that we are splitting the amount of backlinks (links from sites, social media and therefore authority). "/home.aspx"
PA: 67
Linking Root Domains: 52
Total Links: 272 "/"
PA: 64
Linking Root Domains: 29
Total Links: 128 I am under the impression that if the URLs were the same we would maximise our backlinks and therefore page authority. My Question: How can I fix this? Should I have a 301 redirect from the page "/" to the "/home.aspx" therefore passing the authority and link juice of “/” directly to “/homes.aspx”? Trying to gather thoughts and ideas on this, suggestions are much appreciated? Thanks!0 -
Question Concerning Pages With Too Many Links:
I have run SEO moz software for a clients site, Its showing that virtually every single page has too many links. For instance this url: http://www.golfthere.com/AboutUs Am I missing something? I do not see 157 links on this page.
Technical SEO | | ToddKing0 -
URL query strings and canonical tag
Hi, I have recently been getting my comparison website redesigned and developed onto wordpress and the site is now 90% complete. Part of the redesign has meant that there are now dynamic urls in the format: http://www.mywebsite.com/10-pounds-productss/?display=cost&value=10 I have other pages similar to this but with different content for the different price ranges and these are linked to from the menus: http://www.mywebsite.com/20-pounds-products/?display=cost&value=20 Now my questions are: 1. I am using Joost's All-in-one SEO plugin and this adds a canonical tag to the page that is pointing to http://www.mywebsite.com/10-pounds-products/ which is the permalink. Is this OK as it is or should i change this to http://www.mywebsite.com/10-pounds-products/?display=cost&value=10 2. Which URL will get indexed, what gets shown as the display URL in the SERPs and what page will users land on? I'm a bit confused so apologies if these seem like silly questions. Thanks
Technical SEO | | bizarro10000 -
Should i use NoIndex, Follow & Rel=Canonical Tag In One Page?
I am having pagination problem with one of my clients site , So I am deciding to use noindex, follow tag for the Page 2,3,4 etc for not to have duplicated content issue, Because obviously SEOMoz Crawl Diagnostics showing me lot of duplicate page contents. And past 2 days i was in constant battle whether to use noindex, follow tag or rel=canonical tag for the Page 2,3,4 and after going through all the Q&A,None of them gives me crystal clear answer. So i thought "Why can't i use 2 of them together in one page"? Because I think (correct me if i am wrong) 1.noindex, follow is old and traditional way to battle with dup contents
Technical SEO | | DigitalJungle
2.rel=canonical is new way to battle with dup contents Reason to use 2 of them together is: Bot finds to the non-canonical page first and looks at the tag nofollow,index and he knows not to index that page,meantime he finds out that canonical url is something something according to the url given in the tag,NO? Help Please???0 -
Which version of pages should I build links to?
I'm working on the site www.qualityauditor.co.uk which is built in Moonfruit. Moonfruit renders pages in Flash. Not ideal, I know, but it also automatically produces an HTML version of every page for those without Flash, Javascript and search engines. This HTML version is fairly well optimised for search engines, but sits on different URLs. For example, the page you're likely to see if browsing the site is at http://www.qualityauditor.co.uk/#/iso-9001-lead-auditor-course/4528742734 However, if you turn Javascript off you can see the HTML version of the page here <cite>http://www.qualityauditor.co.uk/page/4528742734</cite> Mostly, it's the last version of the URL which appears in the Google search results for a relevant query. But not always. Plus, in Google Webmaster Tools fetching as Googlebot only shows page content for the first version of the URL. For the second version it returns HTTP status code and a 302 redirect to the first version. I have two questions, really: Will these two versions of the page cause my duplicate content issues? I suspect not as the first version renders only in Flash. But will Google think the 302 redirect for people is cloaking? Which version of the URL should I be pointing new links to (bearing in mind the 302 redirect which doesn't pass link juice). The URL's which I see in my browser and which Google likes the look at when I 'fetch as Googlebot'. Or those Google shows in the search results? Thanks folks, much appreciated! Eamon
Technical SEO | | driftnetmedia0