301 and rel=canonical AGAINNNN
-
Trying to understand rel=canonical if you have proper 301 redirects (redirects to the canonical URl) for example when migrating from a HTTP to HTTPS environment why would you also opt to add a rel=cannonical tag on the same pages. What effect does this have on SERP rankings or is it ok to have 301 redirects and rel=canonicalon the same page? Anyone?
-
No reason to use both. I would even go as far as to say I wouldn't recommend it.
301 and canonical have different purposes.
301 forwards user to another page. Canonical removes the page from the index but the user is still browsing that page.
I guess you know that.I wouldn't want to give Google even the slightest chance to mix it up and read it wrong.
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
-
Unsolved Product search menu Canonical tag and missing description errors
We have recently migrated to an entirely new website, Moz is now picking up many meta data issues, the bulk of these are from descriptions and missing canonical tags from product search pages (i.e, customer searches for a product and the search results page is the one being picked up, is this is a big issue for the site's overall SEO rating and if so what can be done to resolve this?
Moz Pro | | iPharm0 -
Wix 301 Root Domain to HTTPS
We built our website on Wix, and Moz is saying that there is a 301 redirect chain issue: http://makeshark.com redirects to...
Moz Pro | | Makeshark
http://www.makeshark.com redirects to...
https://www.makeshark.com Is there a way to configure Wix to redirect http:// (with out the "www") straight to https://www?3 -
Canonical tag on webstore products to avoid Duplicate Page Content ?
Hi, I would like to have an opinion on what how we are planning to solve the issue with Duplicate Page Contents that MOZ PRO is showing us. MOZ Pro is showing us a lot of pages with duplicate content as High Priority Issue. Mainly the problem is with products which have very few differences between them, e.g. pink bike model X and red bike model X. So we decided to implement a canonical tag on these products, and the pink bike model X will now have a canonical pointing to the red bike model X. So hopefully we will be ranking higher with our red bike model X and our pink bike model X will disapear from the index. Am I right ? Is it a good practice, since we will loose long tails indexes? I check each canonical in the Search Console, and we have extremely few searched for "pink bike model X" most of searches are "bike model X". Thank you in advance for your opinion. Isabelle
Moz Pro | | isabelledylag0 -
Rel=canonical SEO Ultimate plug in
I like SEO ultimate and use the rel=canonicalizer has anyone come into problems with it... ps I still cant get my head around canonical tags!
Moz Pro | | Agentmorris0 -
HTC access 301 redirect rules regarding pagination and striped category base (wp)
I am an admin of a wordpress.org blog and I used to use "Yoast All in one SEO" plugin. While I was using this plugin it stripped the category base from my blog post URL's. With yoast all in one seo: Site.com/topic/subtpoic/page/#
Moz Pro | | notgwenevere
Without yoast all in one seo: Site.com/category/topic/subtopic/page/# Now, that I have switched to another plugin, I am trying to manage the page crawl errors which are tremendous somewhere around 1800, mostly due to pagination. Rather than redirecting each URL individually I would like to develop HTC access 301 redirects rules. However all instructions on how to create these HTC access 301 redirect rules are regarding the suffix rather than the category base. So my question is, can HTC access 301 redirects rules work to fix this problem? Including pagination? And if so, what would this particular HTC access 301 redirect look like? Especially regarding pagination? And do I really have to write a 301 redirect for each pagination page?0 -
Canonical Confusion
Hey guys, I'm having a hard time grasping canonical links and the warnings I'm getting on my report card. I'm using Yoast SEO Plug-In and can see that every page on my site has a canonical reference to the URL of the page I'm at. Can someone please enlighten me on this subject. I'm reading everything I can about Canonicalization (honestly...an easier word please) but I does not make sense yet. Thanks! I added the notice I'm getting on my report card. This is my domain http://bbguard.com.ve swG7x.png
Moz Pro | | FDSConsulting0 -
Is canonical link enough?
Hi SEOmozers! I have a question. SEOmoz analysis report me some duplicate that I thought I had fix. I can give a concrete example. This page: http://www.nuxeo.com/en/about/events/dec2011training-boston/moreinfo is reported as having 6 duplicated URL in the tool. When I click on 6, SEOMOZ tells me "Our crawl bots are getting their joints greased to fetch you even better data. Sorry for the delay!" And on the page itself, I placed a canonical link to follow recommandation. rel="canonical" href="http://www.nuxeo.com/en/about/events/apr2012training-boston" /> As a result I am curious why I would have this reported as duplicate by SEOmoz. Is this a bug? Thanks for feedback!
Moz Pro | | nuxeo0 -
Why aren't canonical tags reducing duplicate page title/content?
We have canonical tags set up for a feature page on one of our sites. This site has an image gallery controlled by javascript. To aid the user experience the image can also be specified by a URL parameter (the javascript also uses this URL to fetch the images). The SEOMoz report complains that the links to these images have duplicate page titles and content. To try and combat this we set canonical tags to point only to the original page, without the slideshow parameter. e.g. http://www.example.com/feature-page/ http://www.example.com/feature-page/?slideshow=1 -> canonical tag set to http://www.example.com/feature-page/ http://www.example.com/feature-page/?slideshow=2 -> canonical tag set to http://www.example.com/feature-page/ The latest SEOMoz report has come back and the errors still exist. What can we do to remove these error messages? Thanks
Moz Pro | | TJSSEO1