Site-wide Canonical Rewrite Rule for Multiple Currency URL Parameters?
-
Hi Guys,
I am currently working with an eCommerce site which has site-wide duplicate content caused by currency URL parameter variations. Example:
https://www.marcb.com/?setCurrencyId=3
https://www.marcb.com/?setCurrencyId=2
https://www.marcb.com/?setCurrencyId=1
My initial thought is to create a bunch of canonical tags which will pass on link equity to the core URL version. However I was wondering if there was a rule which could be implemented within the .htaccess file that will make the canonical site-wide without being so labour intensive.
I also noticed that these URLs are being indexed in Google, so would it be worth setting a site-wide noindex to these variations also?
Thanks
-
Added to note - you can also use GDC to inform Google which URL parameters should be ignored when indexing - can be a quick shortcut initially, but you'll definitely want to get rel-canonical properly implemented for Google as well as all the other search engines.
-
This issue is resolved by adding a single self-referential rel-canonical tag to the header of each page of the site, Catherine. Once you've done that, the URLs that contain the parameters will automatically contain the canonical to the primary URL (because the pages' code are actually the same - it's just the URL itself that is changing. By which I mean - there aren't separate pages for each of the currencies. They're are all the same page code, with just the parameter added to the URL and prices dynamically changed.)
This does mean that the search engines would index the page with the default prices, which appears to be Euros.
For example, if your home page had a self-referential canonical tag, it's canonical tag would be
<link rel="<a class="attribute-value">canonical</a>" href="<a class="attribute-value">http://www.marcb.com</a>" />
While this may seem redundant, it also means that this URL https://www.marcb.com/?setCurrencyId=2 would also contain the above canonical tag, since the page is actually built from the same code. So it's canonical would point to the correct URL automatically, without having to do anything specific for all those variations. This is a core function of how CMSs (Content Management Systems) templates work. This time it works in your favour.
You definitely don't want to no-index those parameter-based variations even if you could. Once you get the canonicals properly implemented, you want the search crawlers to keep crawling those pages URLs so they can discover the corrected canonicals and understand that they are intentional dupes of the core page. They'll eventually drop the parameter-based URLs out of the index, which you can monitor in your Google Search Console, for example. There's a major benefit to the site if the search crawlers aren't wasting their time on duplicate/useless pages, as well as reducing potential issues with Panda/Quality algorithms, so well worth getting this corrected right away.
Hope all that makes sense?
Paul
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
-
Using Similar Expired URLs to Send Traffic to My Site
Thanks in advance for any help! I have an existing website with content on a particular topic. I have discovered a few similar expired URLs that might still get some traffic. One in particular still has a number of valid links from other sites. Would it make sense for me to buy those URLs (which are really cheap) and just use them to send that traffic to my site? If so, am I better using a 301 redirect or having a home page on the new site that just mentions that the old site is expired, and that they might want to instead link over to my site?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | alanjosephs0 -
When I crawl my website I have urls with (#!162738372878) at the end of my urls
When I crawl my website I have urls with (#!162738372878) at the end of my urls. I used screaming frog to look check my website and I seen these. My normal urls are in there too, but each of them have a copy with this strange symbol and number at the end. I used a website builder called homestead to make the website and I seen a bunch of there urls in my crawl as well - http://editor.homestead.com/faq is an example I recently created a new website with their new website builder and transferred it to my old domain. However, I didnt know they didnt offer 301 redirects or canonical tags(learned about those afterwards) and I changed my page names. So they recommended I leave the old website published along with the new website. So if I search my website name on google, sometimes both will show in the results. I just want to sort this all out somehow. My website is www.coastlinetvinstalls.com Any feedback is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Matt
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Matt160 -
I need help on how best to do a complicated site migration. Replacing certain pages with all new content and tools, and keeping the same URL's. The rest just need to disappear safely. Somehow.
I'm completely rebranding a website but keeping the same domain. All content will be replaced and it will use a different theme and mostly new plugins. I've been building the new site as a different site in Dev mode on WPEngine. This means it currently has a made-up domain that needs to replace the current site. I know I need to somehow redirect the content from the old version of the site. But I'm never going to use that content again. (I could transfer it to be a Dev site for the current domain and automatically replace it with the click of a button - just as another option.) What's the best way to replace blahblah.com with a completely new blahblah.com if I'm not using any of the old content? There are only about 4 URL'st, such as blahblah.com/contact hat will remain the same - with all content replaced. There are about 100 URL's that will no longer be in use or have any part of them ever used again. Can this be done safely?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | brickbatmove1 -
Need help in de-indexing URL parameters in my website.
Hi, Need some help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ImranZafar
So this is my website _https://www.memeraki.com/ _
If you hover over any of the products, there's a quick view option..that opens up a popup window of that product
That popup is triggered by this URL. _https://www.memeraki.com/products/never-alone?view=quick _
In the URL you can see the parameters "view=quick" which is infact responsible for the pop-up. The problem is that the google and even your Moz crawler is picking up this URL as a separate webpage, hence, resulting in crawl issues, like missing tags.
I've already used the webmaster tools to block the "view" parameter URLs in my website from indexing but it's not fixing the issue
Can someone please provide some insights as to how I can fix this?0 -
Is there an advantage to using rel=canonical rather than noindex on pages on my mobile site (m.company.com)?
Is there an advantage to using link rel=alternate (as recommended by Google) rather than noindex on pages on my mobile site (m.company.com)? The content on the mobile pages is very similar to the content on the desktop site. I see Google recommends canonical and alternate tags, but what are the benefits of using those rather than noindex?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jennifer.new0 -
GWT url parameter issue/question
Hi Moz community, I'm having an issue with URL parameters in GWT. The tracking taxonomy for my websites is used as either /?izid=... (internal) OR /?dzid=... (external) I put tracking parameters in GWT as izid & dzid, but it hasn't picked up any URLs or examples in regards to these parameters. It's been about 2 months since we've started using this so I want to make sure Google isn't indexing as duplicate content. Side note: any page that uses a tracking parameter automatically adds rel="canonical" to the original page. Could this be the reason that GWT doesn't pick up any URLs for tracking parameters and/or do I not need to worry about adding paramters if I already have the canonical attribute automatically in place. Thanks for your help,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | IceIcebaby
-Reed0 -
Does it make sense to combine multiple news sites under one domain?
My company operates multiple news site brands across several markets and typically operates one website per market/brand. We've been advised that in the case of one of the newer markets, where each brand might only be publishing 3 articles a week, that combining all that market's brands under one domain will drive higher traffic from search because Google values higher article flow. Getting this done will be a lot of work. Is the juice worth the squeeze? And assuming we get the UX right and execute 301 redirects correctly, are there major risks to search traffic?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AlecD0 -
Push for site-wide https, but all pages in index are http. Should I fight the tide?
Hi there, First Q&A question 🙂 So I understand the problems caused by having a few secure pages on a site. A few links to the https version a page and you have duplicate content issues. While there are several posts here at SEOmoz that talk about the different ways of dealing with this issue with respect to secure pages, the majority of this content assumes that the goal of the SEO is to make sure no duplicate https pages end up in the index. The posts also suggest that https should only used on log in pages, contact forms, shopping carts, etc." That's the root of my problem. I'm facing the prospect of switching to https across an entire site. In the light of other https related content I've read, this might seem unecessary or overkill, but there's a vaild reason behind it. I work for a certificate authority. A company that issues SSL certificates, the cryptographic files that make the https protocol work. So there's an obvious need our site to "appear" protected, even if no sensitive data is being moved through the pages. The stronger push, however, stems from our membership of the Online Trust Alliance. https://otalliance.org/ Essentially, in the parts of the internet that deal with SSL and security, there's a push for all sites to utilize HSTS Headers and force sitewide https. Paypal and Bank of America are leading the way in this intiative, and other large retailers/banks/etc. will no doubt follow suit. Regardless of what you feel about all that, the reality is that we're looking at future that involves more privacy protection, more SSL, and more https. The bottom line for me is; I have a site of ~800 pages that I will need to switch to https. I'm finding it difficult to map the tips and tricks for keeping the odd pesky https page out of the index, to what amounts to a sitewide migratiion. So, here are a few general questions. What are the major considerations for such a switch? Are there any less obvious pitfalls lurking? Should I even consider trying to maintain an index of http pages, or should I start work on replacing (or have googlebot replace) the old pages with https versions? Is that something that can be done with canonicalization? or would something at the server level be necessary? How is that going to affect my page authority in general? What obvious questions am I not asking? Sorry to be so longwinded, but this is a tricky one for me, and I want to be sure I'm giving as much pertinent information as possible. Any input will be very much appreciated. Thanks, Dennis
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dennis.globalsign0