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
-
How do I recover from a double 301 mistake?
We have a site that was ranking top 10 for 15 KW and top 20 for about 40. We decided to restructure the site to create silos. The old site used a plugin to create ".html" pages and the juice in Google was all on those pages. We asked our developer to eliminate the plugin / .html and forward the .html pages to our new structure. Instead, he took a shortcut and did a mass forward in code which resulted in all pages - such as "example.com/mypage.html" now forwarding to "example.com/mypage/" - He then did a 301 redirect from those pages with the "/" such as example.com/mypage/ to "example.com/my-new-page/". He did this for over 500 pages. To make matters worse, he mis-mapped about 100 pages and Google saw them as 404s, then in fixing those errors, new ones kept popping up. Those are now fixed. The net result is that we dropped like a stone on all of our rankings. Moving forward, do you think we can regain ground by manually doing 301s for the original .html pages to their new locations and eliminating the interim step? What would be your suggestions to recover as quickly as possible?
Moz Pro | | kramerico20 -
Do we need rel="prev" and rel="next" if we have a rel="canonical" for the first page of a series
Despite having a canonical on page 1 of a series of paginated pages for different topics, Google is indexing several, sometimes many pages in each topic. This is showing up as duplicate page title issues in Moz and Screaming Frog. Ideally Google would only index the first page in the series. Do we need to use rel="prev" etc rather than a canonical on page 1? How can we make sure Google crawls but doesn't index the rest of the series?
Moz Pro | | hjsand1 -
Duplicate titles reported with canonical
Hi Mozzers, In the reports it is saying that I have some duplicate content and titles even though there is a canonical tag on them, is anyone else getting this?
Moz Pro | | KarlBantleman0 -
Canonical for Mobile
Hi Guys, I am curious why in SEOMoz, our mobile site is showing to have the canonical tags used on the desktop site but when you double check the code of the mobile website it is showing m.domain.com Any thoughts on why we are seeing this? Also is there any lag in the code updates being reported through the SEOmoz toolset? Thanks for all your help! Cheers,
Moz Pro | | lwalker0 -
Why do pages with canonical urls show in my report as a "Duplicate Page Title"?
eg: Page One
Moz Pro | | DPSSeomonkey
<title>Page one</title>
No canonical url Page Two
<title>Page one</title> Page two is counted as being a page with a duplicate page title.
Shouldn't it be excluded?0 -
Open Site Explorer Issue - Pullng up No-follow links when settings ask for Follow + 301 Redirect..
Anybody else having this issue? Here lately when I am doing competitive research on open site explorer I set it to only pull up followed + 301 redirects and it will still pull up no-follow competitors links. Can anybody help me out here?
Moz Pro | | axzm0 -
Canonical tags and SEOmoz crawls
Hi there. Recently, we've made some changes to http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/ to implement canonical tags to some dynamically generated pages to stop duplicate content issues. Previously, these were blocked with robots.txt. In Webmaster Tools, everything looks great - pages crawled has shot up, and overall traffic and sales has seen a positive increase. However the SEOmoz crawl report is now showing a huge increase in duplicate content issues. What I'd like to know is whether SEOmoz registers a canonical tag as preventing a piece of duplicate content, or just adds to it the notices report. That is, if I have 10 pages of duplicate content all with correct canonical tags, will I still see 10 errors in the crawl, but also 10 notices showing a canonical has been found? Or, should it be 0 duplicate content errors, but 10 notices of canonicals? I know it's a small point, but it could potentially have a big difference. Thanks!
Moz Pro | | neooptic0 -
301 finder SEO Tool
Hi there, I´m looking for a tool, which shows all 301 redirect links to a domain. Have some competitors which haven´t many links but have quite good rankings. I suppose they have some 301 redirections... Thanks!
Moz Pro | | TheLastSeo0
