Duplicate pages in language versions, noindex in sitemap and canonical URLs in sitemap?
-
Hi SEO experts!
We are currently in the midst of reducing our amount of duplicate titles in order to optimize our SEO efforts. A lot of the "duplicate titles" come from having several language versions of our site.
Therefore, I am wondering:
1. If we start using "" to make Google (and others) aware of alternative language versions of a given site/URL, how big a problem will "duplicate titles" then be across our domains/site versions?
2. Is it a problem that we in our sitemap include (many) URL's to pages that are marked with noindex?
3. Are there any problems with having a sitemap that includes pages that includes canonical URL's to other pages?
Thanks in advance!
-
Thank you so much for your insightful answers!
-
**1. If we start using "" to make Google (and others) aware of alternative language versions of a given site/URL, how big a problem will "duplicate titles" then be across our domains/site versions? **
If you have translations, that is content that is exactly the same, just translated, HREFLANG is highly recommended for Google. Bing uses another tag though. However, your titles should be different give that they are in different languages. Check out my presentation here: http://www.slideshare.net/DistilledSEO/searchlove-boston-2013kate-morrisinternational-seo
**2. Is it a problem that we in our sitemap include (many) URL's to pages that are marked with noindex? **
I wouldn't put pages in the sitemap that have a noindex. It won't hurt you by any means, just seems a waste of time.
**3. Are there any problems with having a sitemap that includes pages that includes canonical URL's to other pages? **
It's not recommended but it's also not a problem. The only issue comes in having pages that redirect or break all together.
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
-
Do orphan pages take away link juice?
Hi, Just wondering about this whether the orphan pages take away any link juice? We been creating lot of them these days only to link from external sites as landing pages on our site. So, not linking from any part of our website; just linking from other websites. Also, will they get any link juice if they are linked from our own blog-post? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz1 -
Rel canonical on other page instead of duplicate page. How Google responds?
Hi all, We have 3 pages for same topics. We decided to use rel canonical and remove old pages from search to avoid duplicate content. Out of these 3 pages....1 and 2 type of pages have more similar content where 3 type don't have. Generally we must use rel canonical between 1 and 2. But I am wondering what happens if I canonical between 1 and 3 while 2 has more similar content? Will Google respects it or penalise as we left the most similar page and used other page for canonical. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Content strategy for landing pages: Topics vs Features
Hi all, We are going to create new landing pages and optimise existing pages. We have a confusion on how to employ content on these pages....whether these will be filled with content to rank for "topics" and "keywords" or direclty jump into the features are are providing. If we go with first, users may feel boring about teaching them about that topic, if we go with latter...it's hard to rank being no related content to rank for that topic. I have seen some of the websites are employing multiple landing pages where they fill with topic related content and then link to features pages. I need suggestions here. Thank you
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz1 -
Clicks are the ultimate factor to stick the page on position?
Hi all, We know many factors contribute to make a page rank at (top) position like somewhere in top 5 results. I have seen some of our pages suddenly spike to that positions and locked there. They been receiving clicks too. Will they be dropped if they don't get estimated clicks? I think many factors contribute to make a page rank higher but clicks are the one factor which makes the page consistently rank at its best position. What do you say? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Have I been Hit by a Penguin? No Warning in Webmaster / Some Pages still Rank
Hi all, I have recently signed up to MOZ as I have seen a large drop in the turnover of a site I work with as well as a slump in visitors. I know part of this slump is the transition from google product search from being free to paid and chewing through our adwords budget quicker. The other part though seems a little more tricky, I have always been under the impression from reading online that an algorithm update would see a site destroyed for most terms and a notification generated in webmaster tools, however the site still seems to still rank for some terms, others however it has fallen off the face of the earth for. As you can see in the attachment webmaster tools is showing much decreased visibility, and MOZ agrees with this. Key terms that have lost rank have done so by around 4-10 positions. The content on the site has all been hand written by myself, however some of the pages are a little "stale" so I am currently running through re-writing every product page on the site (1000 products or so) all my product pages grade a minimum B with 99% A on the Moz page grader. I am keeping my fingers crossed that fresh content should assist in getting google interested again? However my real questions is, Is this Penguin? or is this just stale content? dmDdMr5.jpg pYkzck0.jpg 9f4mgM9.jpg
Algorithm Updates | | speedingorange1 -
Is it wise to conduct a link building campaign to a Google+ Local page?
Is it wise, while doing a link building campaign to not only focus on the main website target page, but also the Google+ Local page? Here are two strategies I was thinking of using: 1. Conduct a city specific link building campaign to direct traffic to the location specific page on the main website AND the Google+ Local page. 2. Use the main website to direct traffic to each cities specific Google+ Local page. Does it make sense to drive links to a Google+ Local page? It does to me, but I haven't seen anything written about that yet... or perhaps I've just missed it along the way. I'd love to hear the communities thoughts. Thanks! Doug
Algorithm Updates | | DougHoltOnline0 -
Google said that low-quality pages on your site may affect rankings on other parts
One of my sites got hit pretty hard during the latest Google update. It lost about 30-40% of its US traffic and the future does not look bright considering that Google plans a worldwide roll-out. Problem is, my site is a six year old heavy linked, popular Wordpress blog. I do not know why the article believes that it is low quality. The only reason I came up with is the statement that low-quality pages on a site may affect other pages (think it was in the Wired article). If that is so, would you recommend blocking and de-indexing of Wordpress tag, archive and category pages from the Google index? Or would you suggest to wait a bit more before doing something that drastically. Or do you have another idea what I could to do? I invite you to take a look at the site www.ghacks.net
Algorithm Updates | | badabing0
