Rel=canonical on landing page question
-
Currently we have two versions of a category page on our site (listed below)
Version A: www.example.com/category
• lives only in the SERPS but does not live on our site navigation
• has links
• user experience is not the best
Version B: www.example.com/category?view=all
• lives in our site navigation
• has a rel=canonical to version A
• very few links and doesn’t appear in the SERPS
• user experience is better than version A
Because the user experience of version B is better than version A I want to take out the rel=canonical in version B to version A and instead put a rel=canonical to version B in version A. If I do this will version B show up in the SERPS eventually and replace version A? If so, how long do you think this would take? Will this essentially pass page rank from version A to version B
-
Hi there
Alot of this sounds off to me. First, I'd think you'd want /category living in the navigation, be indexed, have links, and have a great user experience.
In my mind, www.example.com/category?view=all should only exist as a filtering URL when you change the number of URLs you want to see on the page itself.
You'll have substantially more luck focusing on version A in my opinion. Focus on creating a great user experience and optimization strategy, and you should reap the benefits at a deeper level.
Let me know if this helps! Good luck!
Patrick
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
-
I want to move some pages of my website to a folder and nav menu in those pages should only show inner page links, will it hurt SEO?
Hi, My website has a few SaaS products, to make my website simple i want to move my website some pages to its specific folder structure , so eg website.com/product1/features
Technical SEO | | webbeemoz
website.com/product1/pricing
website.com/product1/information and same for product2 and so on, the website.com/product1/.. menu will only show the links of product1 and only one link to homepage (possibly in footer). Please share your opinion will it be a good idea, from UI perspective it will be simple , but i am not sure about SEO perspective, please help thanks0 -
Rel=canonical or 301 to pass on page authority/juice
I have a large body of product support documentation and there are similar pages for each of versions of the product, with minor changes as the product changes. The two oldest versions of this documentation get the best ranking and are powering Google snippets--however, this content is out of date. The team responsible for the support documentation wants current pages to rank higher. I suggested 301 redirects but they want to maintain the old page content for clients still using the older version of the product. Is there a way to move a page's power to a more updated version of the page, but without wiping out the old content? Considering recommending canonical tags, but I'm not sure this will get me all the way there either as there are some differences between pages, especially as the product has changed over time. Thoughts?
Technical SEO | | rachelholdgrafer0 -
Avoid landing page redirects
Avoid landing page redirects for the following chain of redirected URLs. http://domainname.com/ https://domainname.com/ https://www.domainname.com/ Anyone know how to solve this issue the correct way?
Technical SEO | | Sammyh0 -
SEO Content Audits Questions (Removing pages from website, extracting data, organizing data).
Hi everyone! I have a few questions - we are running an SEO content audit on our entire website and I am wondering the best FREE way to extract a list of all indexed pages. Would I need to use a mix of Google Analytics, Webmaster Tools, AND our XML sitemap or could I just use Webmaster Tools to pull the full list? Just want to make sure I am not missing anything. As well, once the data is pulled and organized (helpful to know the best way to pull detailed info about the pages as well!) I am wondering if it would be a best practice to sort by high trafficked pages in order to rank them for prioritization (ie: pages with most visits will be edited and optimized first). Lastly, I am wondering what constitutes a 'removable' page. For example, when it is appropriate to fully remove a page from our website? I understand that it is best, if you need to remove a page, to redirect the person to another similar page OR the homepage. Is this the best practice? Thank you for the help! If you say it is best to organize by trafficked pages first in order to optimize them - I am wondering if it would be an easier process to use MOZ tools like Keyword Explorer, Page Optimization, and Page Authority to rank pages and find ways to optimize them for best top relevant keywords. Let me know if this option makes MORE sense than going through the entire data extraction process.
Technical SEO | | PowerhouseMarketing0 -
Why put rel=canonical to the same url ?
Hi all. I've heard that it's good to put the link rel canonical in your header even when there is no other important or prefered version of that url. If you take a look at moz.com and see the code, you'll see that they put the <link rel="<a class="attribute-value">canonical</a>" href="http://moz.com" /> ... pointing at the same url ! But if you go to http://moz.com/products/pricing for example, they have no canonical there ! WHY ? Thanks in advance !
Technical SEO | | Tintanus0 -
3,511 Pages Indexed and 3,331 Pages Blocked by Robots
Morning, So I checked our site's index status on WMT, and I'm being told that Google is indexing 3,511 pages and the robots are blocking 3,331. This seems slightly odd as we're only disallowing 24 pages on the robots.txt file. In light of this, I have the following queries: Do these figures mean that Google is indexing 3,511 pages and blocking 3,331 other pages? Or does it mean that it's blocking 3,331 pages of the 3,511 indexed? As there are only 24 URLs being disallowed on robots.text, why are 3,331 pages being blocked? Will these be variations of the URLs we've submitted? Currently, we don't have a sitemap. I know, I know, it's pretty unforgivable but the old one didn't really work and the developers are working on the new one. Once submitted, will this help? I think I know the answer to this, but is there any way to ascertain which pages are being blocked? Thanks in advance! Lewis
Technical SEO | | PeaSoupDigital0 -
My number of duplicate page title and temporary redirect warnings increased after I enabled Canonical urls. Why? Is this normal?
After receiving my first SEO moz report, I had some duplicate page titles and temporary redirects. I was told enabling Canonical urls would take of this. I enabled the Canonical URLs, but the next report showed that both of those problems had increased three fold after enabled the canonical urls! What happened?
Technical SEO | | btsseo780 -
Does google like Category pages or pages with lots of Products on them?
We are having an issue with getting Google to rank the page we want. To have this page http://www.jakewilson.com/c/52/-/346/Cruiser-Motorcycle-Tires rank for the key word Cruiser Motorcycle Tires; however, this page http://www.jakewilson.com/t/52/-/343/752/Cruiser-Motorcycle-Tires is ranking instead and it has less links and page authority according to site explorer and it is farther down in the hierarchy. I am wondering if google just likes pages that have actual products on them instead of a page leading to the page with all the products. Thoughts?
Technical SEO | | DoRM0