Rel-canonical tag confusion
-
I had our web development company implement the rel-canonical tag on all pages of our website to get rid of the duplicate content months ago. However, when I use the On Page optimizer tool (in previous version) it would tell me I'm not using the rel-canonical tag correctly on the page I was grading and when I untagged use rel-canonical tag in our CMS (which was pointing to the correct page) my grade would go to an A. Now with the new version it says I'm using it wrong either way, when I have the tag used in my CMS and everything else is good I have a B, but one I click to not use Rel-canonical tag I have a C. Both ways it shows up in On-page tool without a check in Apprpriate Use of Rel Canonical.
I've attached pictures. In C version it says - Canonical URL "/info/solutions/" and "/info/solutions/"
In B version: Canonical URL "/info/solutions/"
What am I doing wrong and how do i fix this? Because ALL of my grades have dropped to Bs and Cs.
Thanks!
iklEHOjJLZE4966 [URL]]([URL=http://imgur.com/5BYcV][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/5BYcV.jpg[/IMG][/URL]) 5BYcV
-
The tag should work fine with the partial URL.
If you are still concerned about the warning, try adding the base href tag within the of your page. It would be as follows:
<base href="http://www.aircycle.com/">
This tag explicitly specifies the base URL to which all partial URLs are built upon for a given page. Try adding this tag to just the one page, then running the report again to see if that resolves the issue. If it does, then you know what change the tool is requesting.
To be clear, the canonical tag you are using should be fine for search engines assuming there is no other issue. This may be a specific issue with the tool.
Since testing the base href tag, and the full URL are relatively quick and easy to do, my suggestion is to spend 10 minutes performing these tests to see the results. If the tests work, then you can contact the SEOmoz help desk and report your findings as an issue with the tool. It could be a bug or limitation with the tool.
-
So does the tag still work with the partial URL or no? It worked before, so I'm not sure what the ordeal is now but that the new CMS is causing SEOmoz some difficulty reading this.
I'd have to have my web development company fix it to the full URL.
-
I am going to take my best guess, which would need to be tested.
The tool is seeing a partial URL and it does not like it. The best way to confirm the issue is add the complete URL and then test the page. If it passes, then I am correct.
<link href='http://www.aircycle.com/info/solutions/' rel='canonical' /> -
the missing one just shows the Canonical url listing the rest of the URL twice.
B version: "/info/solutions/"
c version: "/Info/solutions/" and "/info/solutions/"
-
-
The first and third images appear the same to me, and the second image is a broken link.
"/info/solutions/" is not a complete URL. It can't be indexed.
Can you possibly share the URL to an example of a web page with this issue?
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
-
How to Avoid Duplicate Page Content errors when using Wordpress Categories & Tags?
I get a lot of duplicate page errors on my crawl diagnostics reports from 'categories' and 'tags' on my wordpress sites. The post is 1x link and then the content is 'duplicated' on the 'category' or 'tag' that is added to the page. Should I exclude the tags and categories from my sitemap or are these issues not that important? Thanks for your help Stacey
Moz Pro | | skehoe1 -
Duplicate content in crawl despite canonical
Hi! I've had a bunch of duplicate content issues come up in a crawl, but a lot of them seem to have canonical tags implemented correctly. For example: http://www.alwayshobbies.com/brands/aztec-imports/-catg=Fireplaces http://www.alwayshobbies.com/brands/aztec-imports/-catg=Nursery http://www.alwayshobbies.com/brands/aztec-imports/-catg=Turntables http://www.alwayshobbies.com/brands/aztec-imports/-catg=Turntables?page=0 Aztec http://www.alwayshobbies.com/brands/aztec-imports/-catg=Turntables?page=1 Any ideas on what's happening here?
Moz Pro | | neooptic0 -
Huge spike in crawl errors today - mozbot ignoring noindex tag?
Hi Mozzers, Today I received a ton of errors and warnings in my weekly crawl due to the mozbot crawling my noindex'd search results pages, such as this - http://www.consumerbase.com/Mailing-Lists.html?q=Construction&type=bus&channel=all&page=7&order=title&orderBy=DESC See image: http://screencast.com/t/qaZzq78j2Udx Anyone else seen a similar error this week with their crawl? Thanks!
Moz Pro | | Travis-W0 -
Rel=canonical "redirects" to double links
Our devs have set up rel=canonical on our website. First they used relative links href="/dir1/dir2/dir3" for the page http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3/?detail1=1?detail2=2 meaning that it will redirect to http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3, but no luck, the MOZ dashboard showed the tag value to be http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3/dir1/dir2/dir3, then we have decided to rewrite the code, and now the canonical to http://wwwmysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3/?detail1=1?detail2=2 looks like href="http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3/" but the tag on MOZ looks like http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3. So what is the problem? I really got a problem or MOZ does? The code on website looks exactly like href="http://www.aaa.com/en/bbb/ccc/vvv/nnn/" rel="canonical" /> for the page http://www.aaa.com/en/bbb/ccc/vvv/nnn/
Moz Pro | | apartmentGin0 -
A 301 redirect to a page with a rel canonical to a page with a 301 question...
MOZ registers thousands of DC and Duplicate titles on a Drupal site which has a little strange setup. Example: www.1234.com/en-us 301 redirects to www.realsite.com/en-us which has a rel canonical to www.1234.com which 301 redirects to www.realsite.com. If you're still with me I thank you.
Moz Pro | | Crunchii
My question is since MOZ registers errors, if indeed the rel canonical isn't recognized due to a 301 redirect?0 -
Why do I keep getting "more than one canonical URL tag" on-page factor when, in fact, there is always only one?
The following are pages that SEOMOZ says have "more than one canonical URL tag" but they all have only one. Can someone help me understand this?http://www.lasercenterny.com/Laser-Hair-Removal-Binghamton/tabid/1950/Default.aspxhttp://www.lasercenterny.com/Hair-Removal-Binghamton-NY/tabid/1949/Default.aspxhttp://www.lasercenterny.com/Hair-Removal-Binghamton/tabid/1948/Default.aspx
Moz Pro | | SmartWebPros0 -
Can overly dynamic URLs be overcome with canonical meta tags?
I tried searching for questions regarding dynamic URLs and canonical tags, but I couldn't find anything s hopefully this hasn't been covered. There are a large number of overly dynamic URLs reported in our site crawl (>7,000). I haven't looked at each of these, but most of these either have a canonical meta tag or have are indicated as FOLLOW, NO INDEX pages. Will these be enough to overcome any negative SEO impact that may come from overly dynamic URLs? We are down to almost 0 critical errors and this is now the biggest problem reported by the site crawl after too many on page links.
Moz Pro | | afmaury0 -
Confused by Google Mobile App (on Blackberry) results??!
First off, Hi guys I'm a new user here, in fact only in my second week of my trial period. However, I can assure you that I'll be continuing my subscription as this website is 'one hell of a bit of kit!'. Now, to my predicament. I have a website: http://www.limegreenofficeproducts.co.uk which I am trying to move on up the rankings in Google (just like everyone else...). Well, I have followed the instructions and guidance through the Campaign Manager and I have 'A' ratings now for a couple of my preferred keywords, namely 'Office Supplies' & 'Office Products'. I also have a number of textlinks with these exact terms, some quite powerful (I'm the only outbound link on a Homepage PR5 on one). Anyway, being a complete and utter control freak - I wake up in the morning and check my rankings using the Google Mobile App for Blackberry whilst throwing as much coffee as possible down my neck. Basically (if you're not familiar with this app, it is just the same as connecting to the mobile internet and carrying out a search - or at least it should be). Well I was really excited to find that I was ranking at No.41 for 'Office Supplies' and No.17 for 'Office Products'. When I fully woke up and ventured to the office, I checked on the Mac through the normal Google UK and I'm nowhere, for either? What makes it even more confusing is that the results on the mobile seem to be intermittent - so if I check at 11.00am I'm No.17, 11.05 I'm nowhere, 11.10 back to No.17 - but only on the Mobile App. I have the Mobile App set up to Google UK, so that can't be the problem. I'm just wondering if either the Mobile App is ahead of the 'Real' Google UK results, or behind.The main reason for asking, is so that I can establish whether what I am doing is having a positive, or negative effect on the rankings. And if this is an quicker way to find out - then great! I assume the advice to come back will be '..ignore the mobile app..' but as it's being kinder to me than the 'Real' Google I'd like to be a bit kinder to it, and give the little fella the benefit of the doubt. But having said that I just checked the search results (Top 1000) for Keywords 'Office Supplies' & 'Office Products' - For Office Products the site was No.614 and for 'Office Supplies it wasn't in the top 1000, ouch. I know these things take time, as I have worked on a couple of other sites of ours and it seems that as soon as you are about to throw the towel in, the results just kick in. I'm not expecting miracles overnight, far from it - but it has me really confused. Does anyone have any suggestions/advice?(except '...get a life coffee fiend') Regards Limegreen
Moz Pro | | Limegreen0
![http://i.imgur.com/5BYcV.jpg[/IMG][/URL]](http://i.imgur.com/5BYcV.jpg%5B/IMG%5D%5B/URL%5D){kind=link}