Canonical Tags & GWT Parameters
-
A site I'm working on has canonical tags which I find to be accurate, regardless of tracking parameters or anything else added to the url. The tag looks like:
And we have alot of parameters in Google Search Console that look like
Parameter Crawl
page Let Googlebot Decide
destination Let Googlebot Decide
filters Let Googlebot Decide
Since all of our parameters follow a question mark, like
http://www.examplesite.com/questions/avocados?source=ad12345
and all of our pages have canonical tags showing the representative url without the additional parameters, why wouldn't we just have the one parameter in GWT as
Parameter Crawl
? Representative URL
I ask because I find that Google analytics shows pages with parameters as landing pages in search, which has me concerned about Google seeing it as duplicate content.
Thanks! Best... Darcy
-
Thanks, Dirk!
-
If Google for some reason chooses another url as the preferred version rather than the canonical I think you can assume that links to the duplicates are counted as links to the preferred version - no hard evidence to confirm this however.
If you check the Best Practices- Be consistent: Try to keep your internal linking consistent. For example, don't link to
http://www.example.com/page/andhttp://www.example.com/pageandhttp://www.example.com/page/index.htm.
So if possible - rather link to the canonical than the parameter version.
On duplicate content in general - there is an interesting article on Kissmetrics - https://blog.kissmetrics.com/myths-about-duplicate-content/
Dirk
- Be consistent: Try to keep your internal linking consistent. For example, don't link to
-
Hi Dirk,
One last clarification...
If Google ignores the canonical and chooses to take the url with parameters seriously, do you think this is causing a duplicate content issue or at least loss of link juice problem?
For instance, the navigation has parameters. If Google chooses to see a page with parameters as index-worthy instead of the canonical, is it then two duplicates splitting the link juice flowing to what we hoped was the one true url for the page? That would be no bueno.
Thanks! Best... Darcy
-
The problem with canonical url is that it's just a request to Google to index the canonical rather than the real url - Google however is not obliged to do this (to quote google:
"This (=canonical) indicates the preferred URL to use so that the search results will be more likely to show users that URL structure. (Note: We attempt to respect this, but cannot guarantee this in all cases.)"
Example: if all your internal links go to mysite.com/page¶m=xyz with canonical mysite.com/page Google will probably still rather index the real url mysite.com/page¶m=xyz rather than the canonical version.
If you want to be absolutely sure that the parameter version is not indexed you should redirect the parameter version to the non-parameter version with a 301 which is a (binding) directive that Google has to follow.
You could use the parameter tool in Webmaster tools - but you run a risk that if you do it the wrong way Google will not index these pages at all. In any case - it will not solve your reporting issue in Analytics (as people coming from other sources with parameters will still be measured on the parameter url)
Dirk
-
HI Dirk,
Super helpful insight... thanks!
On the people still visiting the page, if they are landing there out of search, why is Google showing them the url with parameters as opposed to just the representative url? That's the part that has me concerned... landing out of search on a page with parameters.
Best... Darcy
-
If you added the canonicals there is no need to configure parameters in search console.
The issue you have in Analytics is not the same - even if google is respecting the canonicals people are still visiting the pages with the parameters and these are tracked in analytics. You can however tell analytics to ignore the parameters and only measure the traffic on the "main" version of the page. A detailed how to can be found here: http://blog.crazyegg.com/2013/03/29/remove-url-parameters-from-google-analytics-reports/
Dirk
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
-
Website excluded from indexing, google-selected canonical: N/A
The google search console revealed to me that none of my pages was indexed, all pages are listed in the 'excluded' section "duplicate, google chose different canonical than user".
Reporting & Analytics | | Fibigrus
But in the URL-inspection tab it shows me google-selected canonical: N/A Indexing and crawling is both allowed. Don't know how to get my pages to be indexed correctly. (by the way, they do NOT exist in other languages, so that can't be a reason why google might think they are a duplicate. There's definitively no other version of those pages available)0 -
UTM parameter problem
Hi guys, Google Search Console gives me an error on these pages: info:https://www.conversal.be/?utm_content=bufferbaaa4&utm_medium=social&utm_source=plus.google.com&utm_campaign=buffer info:https://www.conversal.be/?utm_content=bufferece3f&utm_medium=social&utm_source=plus.google.com&utm_campaign=buffer I see there's an UTM tracking in the URL from Google+. We do have an account there but I don't see how this might give an error. Is this hurting our ranking score? How can we solve this?
Reporting & Analytics | | conversal0 -
Huge Analytics discrepancy when I turned off Analytics Module & Turned on GA via GTM
Hello, I was running universal GA via a GA Drupal module. We setup Google Tag Manager and setup a GA tag to run through GTM. When we pushed the GTM container live our Real Time was at around 1900 and when we turned off the Drupal module the Real Time was reporting around 1100. After 24 hours the sessions for that day were about 100k lower than what they usually are. Any ideas Why the larger discrepancy? Any places that are obvious to look? *I didn't setup the original Drupal GA module, nor do I know who did. Thanks
Reporting & Analytics | | JJLWeber0 -
Google Analytics Question - Impressions & Queries Up, Sessions Down
I'm working with a client who, according to the Google Query report, impressions and sessions are up since we've started work with them about 6 months ago, but Google sessions are down. In moz, we're seeing a gradual, but steady increase in search visibility specifically with Google. Note: this is all organic. From when we started tracking queries, the first month we were tracking there were 43,581 impressions and 690 click throughs for the month. This past month there were 98,293 queries and 1015 clicks throughs for the month (granted not year over year data) - of these 1,015 clicks, 995 of them were from web. However, for those same time periods, sessions from Google are down over 30% - 1,750 vs. 1,189. I'm not sure how to interpret this. I realize that clicks and sessions are not a straightforward comparison, but I would think that if clicks were up according to the query report that sessions would also be up. Is it that some of these clicks are bouncing and therefore not being tracked as a session? Is there a potential issue with how data is being tracked?
Reporting & Analytics | | Corporate_Communications0 -
Title Tag Capitalization Impact on SERP Rankings and Click Through Rates
My company made a branding decision to use lowercase for all of our title tags. This, of course, means that our titles on SERPs are all lower case. Overwhelmingly, it seems that websites use title case. This makes me wonder if we're shooting ourselves in the foot. Does using lower case titles negatively impact our rankings and/or click through rates? Is there any data out there suggesting that title case has a better click through rate than lower case? Thanks for reading!
Reporting & Analytics | | Solid_Gold0 -
Unexplained Crawl Diagnostic Errors & Opencart
Hi, I've been looking at the crawl diagnostics for my site and trying to fix the errors that are showing up but Seomoz is producing some strange results. It's saying pages are duplicated upto 16 times but those pages dont exist. It's adding "page=3", "page=4" to the end of the product URL but I don't see how it's finding those pages, nothing on the site(as far as I can tell) is linking to them. There is no "page=3", just the one product page. Again on the duplicate content it's saying under the "other URLs" there's URLs like "http:///product-a" but again I don't see where it's finding these URLs and obviously those URL's dont work. Those three slashes aren't a typo either. So far I've reduced the amount of errors from 2,005 to 543 but the rest of them I can't make sense of. Also, what does one do when you have two products, eg: "product-a-white" and "product-a-black" to prevent Seomoz from seeing duplicates? Canonical links wont work because there's no parent item, just those two. Google Webmaster tools doesn't seem to have a problem though. Using Opencart 1.5, if it helps. Cheers,
Reporting & Analytics | | AsOneDesign0 -
Google WM Tools: Canonical URL
Hello, We have a Google Webmaster Tools account under nlpca(dot)com but our preferred URL is www.nlpca(dot)com Do I need to delete the account and start over with the correct domain version, or is there a setting I can set somewhere? The code is in Joomla so I can't set a rel="canonical" in just the home page. Currently we have all home page version redirected to www.nlpca(dot)com Thanks!
Reporting & Analytics | | BobGW0 -
Meta Robots Tag - What's it really mean?
I used on a handful of pages recently and noticed that they're still popping up in the Google search index. I'd like to keep these from appearing, so I figured I needed a directive statement with stronger semantic meaning. From what I understand, is what I'm looking for. Using this will keep Google from not only crawling the page, but indexing the page, as well. I decided to see what the official robotstxt.org website said about it, so I checked (link here): the NOFOLLOW directive only applies to links on this page. It's entirely likely that a robot might find the same links on some other page without a NOFOLLOW (perhaps on some other site), and so still arrives at your undesired page. So, is their explanation saying that the page itself will be indexed, but the content / links on it won't be followed / indexed? Let me hear your thoughts, mozzers.
Reporting & Analytics | | mudbugmedia0