How google bot see's two the same rel canonicals?
-
Hi,
I have a website where all the original URL's have a rel canonical back to themselves. This is kinda like a fail safe mode. It is because if a parameter occurs, then the URL with the parameter will have a canonical back to the original URL.
For example this url: https://www.example.com/something/page/1/ has this canonical: https://www.example.com/something/page/1/ which is the same since it's an original URL
This url https://www.example.com/something/page/1/?parameter has this canonical https://www.example.com/something/page/1/ like i said before, parameters have a rel canonical back to their original url's.
SO: https://www.example.com/something/page/1/?parameter and this https://www.example.com/something/page/1/ both have the same canonical which is this https://www.example.com/something/page/1/
Im telling you all that because when roger bot tried to crawl my website, it gave back duplicates. This happened because it was reading the canonical (https://www.example.com/something/page/1/) of the original url (https://www.example.com/something/page/1/) and the canonical (https://www.example.com/something/page/1/) of the url with the parameter (https://www.example.com/something/page/1/?parameter) and saw that both were point to the same canonical (https://www.example.com/something/page/1/)...
So, i would like to know if google bot treats canonicals the same way. Because if it does then im full of duplicates
thanks.
-
Its not about the canonical, its about the crawl optimization. I know that canonical URL saves the situation here, i am working under a fail safe mode in matter of duplicates and i want to believe that the canonical URL implementation is better than good in my website.
I just don't want bot's spending time on pages that have nothing actual to say and are canonicalized to pages that have the important content. That is why i configured the bot to not crawl those parameters in the URL parameters tab in GWT and eventually some time to even drop those results.
-
I would think that you're going a little over the top with what essentially is the job of a canonical tag. you don't need to block robots going to the pages as the canonical tag will be telling robots that its a duplicate version. if the urls have already been indexed it will take time for them to drop off.
-
All the parameters are configured to NO URL's in google webmaster tools URL parameters tab. Check the image http://prntscr.com/e9fs91
Its a better setting to do it straight from webmaster tools than disallowing the parameters in robots.txt
Tho, i have a problem with that because google is indexing these parameters even if its configured to NO URL's check my post here: https://moz.com/community/q/web-master-tools-url-parameters
-
Hello,
Rogerbot struggles a bit with canonical last I checked. You've the right set up you want to stop parameters it's especially helpful for stopping people rankings pages on your site like /?this-site-sucks! Always remember Rogerbot of any other services are a guide only to help you not a 100% true resource that will help you rank so use them like a tool not an authority.
TL:DR - your set up is all ok!
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
-
If I'm using a compressed sitemap (sitemap.xml.gz) that's the URL that gets submitted to webmaster tools, correct?
I just want to verify that if a compressed sitemap file is being used, then the URL that gets submitted to Google, Bing, etc and the URL that's used in the robots.txt indicates that it's a compressed file. For example, "sitemap.xml.gz" -- thanks!
Technical SEO | | jgresalfi0 -
Is this okay with google if i can access my sub categories from two different path?
My website is url is abcd.com. One of my category url is abcd.com/mobile.aspx. Which contains 5 sub categories :- samung Mobile 2) Nokia Mobile 3) Sony Mobile 4) HTC Mobile 5) Blackberry Mobile Now if i go in to HTC Mobile sub categories i.e. abcd.com/htcmobile.aspx here i will see all the product related to HTC Mobile. But at below of all product i will find all sub categories that is samsung mobile, nokia mobile, sony mobile and blackberry mobile. So i want to task is this okay? Google will not count these categories as duplicate that is i can access all 4 categories i.e. samsung, nokia, sony and blackberry from here 1) abcd.com/mobile.aspx and 2) abcd.com/htcmobile.aspx Thanks! Dev
Technical SEO | | devdan0 -
What's wrong with this robots.txt
Hi. really struggling with the robots.txt file
Technical SEO | | Leonie-Kramer
this is it: User-agent: *
Disallow: /product/ #old sitemap
Disallow: /media/name.xml When testing in w3c.org everything looks good, testing is okay, but when uploading it to the server, Google webmaster tools gives 3 errors. Checked it with my collegue we both don't know what's wrong. Can someone take a look at this and give me the solution.
Thanx in advance! Leonie1 -
Google appending keyword to local search result(s)?
I noticed an interesting change today in how one of my clients appears in the SERPs. Google seems to be appending a keyword to his listing title. Client website: www.mycalgarydentist.com Keyword: Calgary dentist Rank: #2 or #1 lately Title tag: Calgary Dentist | Ambiance Dental Google+ Local listing title: Ambiance Dental Link title in SERP: Ambiance Dental: Calgary Dentist That last point is what's interesting, and new. As of a couple weeks ago (before I went on holidays) his link would simply show "Ambiance Dental", which makes sense because that's the title of his Google+ Local listing. Given the above information, I can't see why his link in Google's SERP is "Ambiance Dental: Calgary Dentist" when doing a search for that keyword. When I do a search for "Calgary dentists" or other similar searches, he simply shows as "Ambiance Dental", not "Ambiance Dental: Calgary Dentists" To test yourself, use the Google AdWords Preview Tool (https://adwords.google.com/d/AdPreview/), change locality to "Calgary, AB, Canada" and search. I suspect this doesn't mean he's violating Google's guidelines for business listings (i.e. businesses aren't supposed to add keywords to their business title). I'm certainly curious why this is happening though. Can anyone provide any insight? Has anyone seen anything similar? calgary-dentist-search.png
Technical SEO | | Kenoshi0 -
Rel=Canonical Header Location
Hello, I've been trying to get our rel=canonical issues sorted out. A fellow named Ayaz very kindly pointed out that I'm trying to put the code into the wysisyg editor, but this might not be the best place to put the code. We are using Drupal 6. Where do I insert the code? head> <link rel="canonical" href="http://www.example.com/blog/my-awesome-blog-post"> Thanks!
Technical SEO | | OTSEO0 -
What does the Google Crawler see when crawling this page?
If you look at this page http://www.rockymountainatvmc.com/t/49/61/185/730/Batteries. You will see we have a vehicle filter on it. Right now you only see a picture of a battery and some bad text that needs to be updated ( We just hired a copywriter!). Our question is when google crawls this site will thy just see this or will they see all the products that appear after you pick a "machine type" "make" "model" and "year" Any help would be great. Right now we think it just sees this main page how we have set things up; however, we know that the crawler is also crawling some ajax. We just want to be sure of things.
Technical SEO | | DoRM0 -
Similar pages: noindex or rel:canonical or disregard parameters?!
Hey all! We have a hotel booking website that has search results pages per destinations (e.g. hotels in NYC is dayguest.com/nyc). Pages are also generated for destinations depending on various parameters, that can be star rating, amenities, style of the properties, etc. (e.g. dayguest.com/nyc/4stars, dayguest.com/nyc/luggagestorage, dayguest.com/nyc/luxury, etc.). In general, all of these pages are very similar, as for example, there might be 10 hotels in NYC and all of them will offer luggage storage. Pages can be nearly identical. Come the problems of duplicate content and loss of juice by dilution. I was wondering what was the best practice in such a situation: should I just put all pages except the most important ones (e.g. dayguest.com/nyc) as noindex? Or set it as canonical page for all variations? Or in google webmaster tool ask google to disregard the URLs for various parameters? Or do something else altogether?! Thanks for the help!
Technical SEO | | Philoups0 -
Will syndicated content hurt a website's ranking potential?
I work with a number of independent insurance agencies across the United States. All of these agencies have setup their websites through one preferred insurance provider. The websites are customizable to a point, but the content for the entire website is mostly the same. Therefore, literally hundreds of agency sites have essentially the same content. The only thing that changes is a few "wildcards" in the copy where the agency fills in their city, state, services areas, company history, etc. My questions is: will this syndicated content hurt their ranking potential? I've been toying with the idea of further editing the content to make it more unique to an agency, but I would hate to waste a lot of hours doing this if it won't help anything. Would you expect this approach to be beneficial or a waste of time? Thank you for your help!
Technical SEO | | copyjack0