Duplicate page found with MOZ crawl test?
-
When I crawl my website www.radiantguard.com, the crawl test comes back with what appears to be a duplicate of my home page:
http://www.radiantguard.com and http://www.radiantguard.com/
Does the crawler indeed see two different pages and therefore, are my search engine rankings potentially affected, AND
is this because of how my rel canonical is set up?
-
Thanks Ryan and Chiaryn! All looks good then! So happy
-
Hey Rhonda,
I took a look at your crawl test and I don't see that we are reporting any duplicate pages for http://www.radiantguard.com or http://www.radiantguard.com/. We are actually reporting that http://www.radiantguard.com/ is the canonical tag of http://www.radiantguard.com and we would never report a page as a duplicate of the canonical tag. We do consider these two pages as separate pages, as many sites do also treat them differently, so we try to encompass the most sites with the way we report on pages with trailing slashes.
You may still want to consider Ryan's advice regarding how to deal with these two pages, however, I just wanted to clarify that we are not reporting any duplicates on either pages. Here is a screenshot of the CSV that shows that these pages have no reported duplicates: http://www.screencast.com/t/5FHTfyQe
I hope that helps to clear things up a bit, but please do let me know if you have more questions about the crawl report.
-
Hi Rhonda. Google has a nice article on this very subject here: https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2010/04/to-slash-or-not-to-slash.html The main point is that it's a best practice to choose one or the other format for your locations. From the article:
You can do a quick check on your site to see if the URLs:
http://<your-domain-here>/<some-directory-here>/
(with trailing slash)
http://<your-domain-here>/ <some-directory-here>(no trailing slash)
don’t both return a 200 response code, but that one version redirects to the other.</some-directory-here></your-domain-here></some-directory-here></your-domain-here>If only one version can be returned (i.e., the other redirects to it), that’s great! This behavior is beneficial because it reduces duplicate content. In the particular case of redirects to trailing slash URLs, our search results will likely show the version of the URL with the 200 response code (most often the trailing slash URL) -- regardless of whether the redirect was a 301 or 302.
A 301 redirect is best as it should be the permanent structure of your site moving forward. Cheers!
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
-
Is Moz more accurate than Ahrefs ?
When I check my this website https://joinpakarmy.com.pk/ on Moz it gives me DA 3
Moz Bar | | joinpakarmy234
But when I check it out on Ahrefs, it tells me there is no authority for this site.
So who is more accurate in the result?
thanks0 -
Does Moz have a way to export full SERPs yet?
I don't like being restricted to tracking only three competitors' rankings so I'm wondering if I could just export the full SERPs like I can on Ahrefs and SEMrush.
Moz Bar | | QLP20040 -
Canonical in Moz crawl report
I'm wondering if the moz bot is seeing my rel="canonical" on my pages. There are 2 notices that are bothering me: Overly Dynamic URL Rel Canonical Overly Dynamic URL - This notice is being generated by urls with query strings. On the main page I have the rel="canonical" tag in the header. So every page with the query string has the canonical tag that points to the page that should be indexed. So my question...Why the notice? Isn't this being handled properly with the canonical tag? I know I can use my robots.txt or the tool in Google search console but is it really necessary when I have the canonical on every page? Here is one of the links that has the "Overly Dynamic URL" notice, as you can see the the canonical in the header points to the page without the query string: https://www.vistex.com/services/training/traditional-classroom/registration-form/?values=true&course-title=DMP101 – Data Maintenance Pricing – Business Processes&date=March 14, 2016 Rel Canonical - Every page in my report has this notice "Using rel=canonical suggests to search engines which URL should be seen as canonical". I'm using the rel="canonical" tag on all of my pages by default. Is the report suggesting that I don't do this? Or is it suggesting that I should? Again...why the notice?
Moz Bar | | Brando160 -
That URL is inaccessible Moz grader?
Hi all, I'm having some issues getting my site graded www.balihaiphoto.com + Kauai wedding photographer with On Page grader, where as when I enter another photographer example www.jmoellerphoto.com and getting results. Is there any reason this is going on that I can correct? Many thanks for any help all! -Jon
Moz Bar | | Jon_Gibb0 -
Internal Links Count in Crawl Report
My understanding of the 'Internal Links' results in a moz crawl report is that it represents the number of links on the given page that link to other pages on the same site.Assuming this is a correct assumption: We recently ran a crawl report on www.phase1tech.com. Some of the pages are coming back with a large amount of 'internal links'. These 2 pages for example are showing 800 internal links: http://www.phase1tech.com/Upcoming-Events
Moz Bar | | AISEO
http://www.phase1tech.com/Contact Then there are a number of pages coming back with 705 Internal Links, including: http://www.phase1tech.com/Dalsa-CameraLink-Cameras
http://www.phase1tech.com/Hitachi-CameraLink-Cameras At best there are approximately 70-80 links on these pages. Where are these large counts coming from? Is there a means to see what the links being reported on are? At the same time the 'Too Many On-Page Links' indicates 'No' for some pages with a high number of links, and 'Yes' for pages with a low number of links. For example: http://www.phase1tech.com/Baumer-SX-Series
Too Many On-Page Links: Yes
Internal Links: 2
What's up with that?0 -
Understanding Onsite Elements and Moz's Onpage Grader
I'm currently helping a friend with his website. One of the pages I am targeting for his business is: http://stalbansdentist.com.au/dentist-cairnlea/ The main keyword this page is targeting will be "dentist cairnlea" (Cairnlea is a suburb near Melbourne, Australia) To perfect onsite optimization, I've used the Moz Onpage Grader. Generally, its straightforward, but I have encountered some issues... Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical The page does have the following tag: <link rel="<a class="attribute-value">canonical</a>" href="http://stalbansdentist.com.au/dentist-cairnlea/" />. I thought this would suffice. What exactly do I need to do to fix this critical problem? Appropriate Characters in the URL I don't understand this one. The URL has completely appropriate characters. Why does Moz Onpage Grader insist that URLs here need to be appropriated? No More Than One H1 Tag There appears to be only one H1 tag on this page. Is Moz just wrong on this one or perhaps a little delayed? There were 2 H1 tags before one was deleted and a recheck done with this problem remaining on Moz's onsite check. Any assistance here on these 3 points and just understanding the Moz Onpage grader would be appreciated!
Moz Bar | | Gavo0