URLs with parameters + canonicals + meta robots
-
Hi Moz community!
I'm posting a new question here as I couldn't find specific answer to the case I'm facing.
Along with canonical tags, we are implementing meta robots on our pages (e-commerce website with thousands of pages). Most of the cases have been covered but I still have one unanswered case:
our products are linked from list pages (mostly categories) but they almost always include a tracking parameter (ie /my-product.html?ref=xxx)
products urls are secured with a canonical tag (referring only to the clean url /my-product.html) but what would be the best solution regarding the meta robots?
For now we opted for a meta robot 'noindex, follow' for non canonical urls (so the ones unfortunately linked from our category/list pages), but I'm afraid that it could hurt our SEO (apparently no juice is given from URLs with a noindex robots), and even maybe prevent bots from crawling our website properly ...
Would it be best to have no meta robots at all on these product urls with parameters? (we obviously can't have 'index, follow' when the canonical ref points to another url!).
Thanks for your help!
-
Hi Eric,
Thanks for your answer, but as said in my original post, I can't get rid of these URLs because of tracking (these tracking parameters are used all across the website in order to know from where products are the most clicked etc). One of the only spot where the product URLs are 'parameter free' is in the sitemaps xml.
Most of the time, a link from a list page to a product URL will look like /style/cuff-gold/804-item.html?ref=by-shop%3afashion-and-lifestyle%3a, while the 'true' URL is /style/cuff-gold/804-item.html. In order to prevent duplicate content from these tracking codes (I have seen some products being indexed twice or more because of this), the 1st URL has a meta robots 'noindex,follow' and has for canonical the 2nd one (which has a robots 'index, follow').
I just wanted to make sure this could be the best solution in our case (as we unfortunately can't get rid of these tracking codes) in order to have only clean product URLs indexed, and only once!.
-
Jessica, whenever you think of adding a meta robots noindex, follow tag, I prefer to try to determine if you need the page at all on the website. If you're using a canonical tag, then that's fine--but we prefer to remove pages entirely from the site if you're going to use the noindex, follow tag. A page with that tag on it generally doesn't provide any SEO value to the site, it only allows engines to continue to crawl the site.
even maybe prevent bots from crawling our website properly
When you mention that, the follow tag will actually allow the site to be crawled.If the page on your site is useful for users, then keep it (and use a canonical tag if necessary to prevent duplicate content issues). Otherwise, consider removing the page if you don't want it indexed.
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
-
Have a Robots.txt Issue
I have a robots.txt file error that is causing me loads of headaches and is making my website fall off the SE grid. on MOZ and other sites its saying that I blocked all websites from finding it. Could it be as simple as I created a new website and forgot to re-create a robots.txt file for the new site or it was trying to find the old one? I just created a new one. Google's website still shows in the search console that there are severe health issues found in the property and that it is the robots.txt is blocking important pages. Does this take time to refresh? Is there something I'm missing that someone here in the MOZ community could help me with?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | primemediaconsultants0 -
Mobile Meta Descriptions
Hi we have a e-commerce site on Magento. A lot of the current current meta descriptions are over 120 characters, which is approximately what Google cuts off for mobile search. We want to create mobile meta descriptions but where would we add them to the CMS and how do we tell Google to use the mobile meta description when the site is responsive. Any suggestions would be very much appreciated! Thanks, Chris
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jayoliverwright0 -
What is better for Meta description ??
Hi everybody, I noticed that a lot of websites prefer their meta description would be the first words of the content inside.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | roeesa
I on the other hand thought that google will prefer the meta description to be like a peek to what going to be inside.
anyone can explain me, what is better? Thanks 🙂0 -
Attack of the dummy urls -- what to do?
It occurs to me that a malicious program could set up thousands of links to dummy pages on a website: www.mysite.com/dynamicpage/dummy123 www.mysite.com/dynamicpage/dummy456 etc.. How is this normally handled? Does a developer have to look at all the parameters to see if they are valid and if not, automatically create a 301 redirect or 404 not found? This requires a table lookup of acceptable url parameters for all new visitors. I was thinking that bad url names would be rare so it would be ok to just stop the program with a message, until I realized someone could intentionally set up links to non existent pages on a site.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | friendoffood1 -
Blog URL Canonical
Hi Guy's, I would like to know your thoughts on the following set-up for blog canonical. Option 1 domain.com/blog = <link rel="canonical" href="domin.com/blog"> domain.com/blog-category/general = <link rel="canonical" href="domain.com/blog"> domain.com/blog-article/how-to-set-canonical = no canonical option 2 domain.com/blog = <link rel="canonical" href="domin.com blog"="">(as option 1)</link rel="canonical" href="domin.com> domain.com/blog-category/general = <link rel="canonical" href="domain.com blog-category="" general"="">(this time has the canonical of the category)</link rel="canonical" href="domain.com> domain.com/blog-article/how-to-set-canonical = <link rel="canonical" href="domain.com blog-article="" how-to-set-canonical"="">(this time has the canonical of the article full URL)</link rel="canonical" href="domain.com> Just not sure which is the best option, or even if it is any of the above! Thanks Dan
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Dan1e10 -
Can you Canonical to a URL in a different folder under the same domain?
I want to know if it's possible to add a canonical tag to a URL that points to a URL under a different folder. Content is just about the same. Here's an example (fake urls and product, but structure and parameters are similar to my client's website): domain.com/toy-ducks-results.aspx?color=Purple&model=Elvis domain.com/toy-ducks-details.aspx?color=Purple&model=Elvis&style=Sparkly Let's say that my purple Elvis ducks are really popular. Is there any harm in putting a rel=canonical on the Sparkly Elvis ducks page to the purple Elvis ducks page? Even though they are two different folders? /toy-ducks-results and /toy-ducks-details So, in effect, the preferred folder is /toy-ducks-results Thanks in advance for any help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EEE30 -
Webmaster tool parameters
Hey forum, About my site, idealchooser.com. Few weeks ago I've defined a parameter "sort" at the Google Webmaster tool that says effect: "Sorts" and Crawl: "No URLs". The logic is simple, I don't want Google to crawl and index the same pages with a different sort parameter, only the default page without this parameter. The weird thing is that under "HTML Improvement" Google keeps finding "Duplicate Title Tag" for the exact same pages with a different sort parameter. For example: /shop/Kids-Pants/16//shop/Kids-Pants/16/?sort=Price/shop/Kids-Pants/16/?sort=PriceHi These aren't old pages and were flagged by Google as duplicates weeks after the sort parameter was defined. Any idea how to solve it? It seems like Google ignores my parameters handling requests. Thank you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | corwin0 -
Robots
I have just noticed this in my code name="robots" content="noindex"> And have noticed some of my keywords have dropped, could this be the reason?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Paul780