"Google chose different canonical than user" Issue Can Anyone help?
-
Our site https://www.travelyaari.com/ , some page are showing this error ("Google chose different canonical than user") on google webmasters. status message "Excluded from search results".
Affected on our route page urls mainly. https://www.travelyaari.com/popular-routes-listing
Our canonical tags are fine, rel alternate tags are fine. Can anyone help us regarding why it is happening?
-
Hi Robin,
Nigel has offered some good advice here - the one thing I would also add is that you may want to set up mobile switchboard tags to make it clear to Google that the desktop version is the canonical version for PCs and the mobile version is canonical for mobile.
See more info here: https://developers.google.com/search/mobile-sites/mobile-seo/separate-urls#annotations-for-desktop-and-mobile-urls
-
Hi Robin
I have checked a few of those as well and the desktop version is coming up high in search for PC search and the m. for mobile.
Whilst it is true that Google can choose its own canonicals I think in your case both versions are being shown on the appropriate device and I think the only reason you are seeing the error is that on your mobile version you have the PC version tag as canonical so Google is quite rightly picking the m. - See screenshot
Despite what you are seeing it is not affecting your rankings.
I would also make all listings https as you are linking from a secure page to a lot of non-secure pages.
Regards
Nigel
-
Ah OK Robin you didn't make that clear - I'll have a look.
The stuff about title and description is still very valid.
Regards
Nigel
-
Hi, thank you. But the answer mentioned is not a sure shot.
Problem is not with this URL. The URLs listed inside this URL "https://www.travelyaari.com/popular-routes-listing" Kindly open it and find the lists.
Under new Google Search Console: Index Coverage> Not Indexed> Google chose different canonical than user>66k pages affected.
Those URLs are listed there as an issue. I need to know what is exactly "Google chose different canonical than user".
-
Hi Robin
You have two versions of the page, the desktop and mobile.
If you search from mobile the m. comes up
If you search from PC the desktop page comes up.So there really is no problem. It could just be that if someone is searching on mobile then the desktop version is set as the canonical and so Google has rightly chosen the m.
What is sure is that your search results are not being affected.
My advice though would be to change your title to '**Bus Routes In India - Route Directory | **Travelyaari'
This is because the title does not convey the full meaning. Your page would probably move much higher on the page with this title. And the description: "Get Indian Bus Schedules, timetables & information about bus routes in India. Get daily scheduled bus services & bookings on bus routes more than 20000+ - Travelyaari" Get those keywords in there!
I hope this helps
Regards Nigel
-
Hi,
Please check this old thread on the same (Ruth's reply).
https://moz.com/community/q/google-ignoring-canonical-and-choosing-its-own
Hope this helps!!
Thanks
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
-
Should I Report A SEO Agency to Google
Our competitor has employed the services of a spammy SEO agency that sends spammy links to our site. Though our rankings were affected we have taken the necessary steps. It is possible to send evidence to Google so that they can take down the site. I want to take this action so that other sites will not be affected by them again.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Halmblogmusic0 -
Malicious links on our site indexed by Google but only visible to bots
We've been suffering from some very nasty black hat seo. In Google's index, our pages show external links to various pharmaceutical websites, but our actual live pages don't show them. It seems as though only certain user-agents see the malicious links. Setting up Screaming Frog SEO crawler using the Googlebot user agent also sees the malicious links. Any idea what could have caused this or how this can be stopped? We scanned all files on our webserver and couldn't find any of malicious links. We've changed our FTP and CMS passwords, is there anything else we can do? Thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SEO-Bas0 -
Google is giving one of my competitors a quasi page 1 monopoly, how can I complain?
Hi, When you search for "business plan software" on google.co.uk, 7 of the 11 first results are results from 1 company selling 2 products, see below: #1. Government site (related to "business plan" but not to "business plan software")
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | tbps
#2. Product 1 from Palo Alto Software (livePlan)
#3. bplan.co.uk: content site of Palo Alto Software (relevant to "business plan" but only relevant to "business plan software" because it is featuring and linking to their Product 1 and Product 2 sites)
#4. Same site as #3 but different url
#5. Palo Alto Software Product 2 (Business Plan Pro) page on Palo Alto Software .co.uk corporate site
#6. Same result as #5 but different url (the features page)
#7. Palo Alto Software Product 2 (Business Plan Pro) local site
#8, #9 and #10 are ok
#11. Same as #3 but the .com version instead of the .co.uk This seems wrong to me as it creates an illusion of choice for the customer (especially because they use different sites) whereas in reality the results are showcasing only 2 products. Only 1 of Palo Alto Software's competitors is present on page 1 of the search results (the rest of them are on page 2 and page 3). Did some of you experience a similar issue in a different sector? What would be the best way to point it out to Google? Thanks in advance Guillaume0 -
Cross-Site Links with different Country Code Domains
I have a question with the penguin update. I know they are really cracking down on "spam" links. I know that they are wanting you to shift from linking keywords to the brand name, unless it makes sense in a sentence. We have five sites for one company in the header they have little flag images, that link to different country domains. These domains all have relatively the same domain name besides the country code. My question is, linking these sites back and fourth to each other in this way, does it hurt you in penguin? I know they are wanting you to push your identity but does this cross-site scheme hurt you? In the header of these sites we have something like this. I am assuming the best strategy would probably be to treat them like separate entities. Or, just focus on one domain. They also have some sites that have links in the footer but they are set up like:
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | AlliedComputer
For product visit Domain.com Should nofollows be added on these footer links as well? I am not sure if penguin finds them spammy too.0 -
Can a "Trusted Retailer" badge scheme affect us in the SERPs?
Hi Guys, In the last week our website saw a drop on some of our biggest and best converting keywords and we think it might be down to us rolling out a “Trusted Retailer” badge scheme. We sell our products directly to consumers via our website, but we also sell our products to other online resellers. We think badges are a good to show the consumer that we trust a site. On the 17th September we sent out badges to about 39 of our best retailers, two of whom have already put them on their sites. Instead of sending them a flat jpeg, we sent them HTML files containing code that pulled in the image from our servers. We wanted to host the image to make sure that we always had some leverage. So if a company stopped selling our products, or the quality of their site went down, we could just remove the badge. Whilst at it, we stuck a link in there pointing to an FAQ on our website all about trusted retailers and what people need to look out for. We chose the anchor text “(brand name) Trusted Retailer”, because that seemed to be the most relevant. The code looks like this: (our brand) Trusted Retailer You might notice that there is a div just before the link. This is there to stop the user from clicking on the top 65% of the badge (because this contains the shop name and ID number), and we also used a negative text-indent to move the anchor text out of the way. But right underneath this is our Logo, so it’s almost a hidden link, but you can still click it. So far the badge has been put in on two sites, one of which isn’t so great and maybe looks a tiny bit spammy. (They sell mostly through ebay as opposed to on their main site). Also, these sites seem to have put it on most of their pages! So my questions are; Is this seen as black or grey hat? Is it the fact we put in anchor text with our brand? Or is it the fact the url is transparent in the coding? Or is it the fact the sites are using sitewide links? In any case would Google react so quickly as to penalise us in two days? If this is the issue, do you think there’s anything we can do to stop getting penalised? (Other than having to e-mail 39 retailers back and getting them to take the badges down). Thoughts much appreciated – we do our SEO in-house and are still learning every day… Thank you James
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | OptiBacUK0 -
Link Building after Google updates!
Hello All, I just wanted to ask the question to start a discussion on link building after the Google Updates. I haven't been very proactive lately with regards to link building due to the updates and not wanting to get penalised! Are there any link building trends/techniques people are using since the changes? Thanks, seo_123
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | TWPLC_seo0 -
Can someone explain how a site with no DA, links or MozTrust, MozRank can rank #1 in the SERPs?
I do SEO for a legal site in the UK and one of the keywords I'm targeting is 'Criminal Defence Solicitors'. If you search this term in Google.co.uk this site comes top www.cdsolicitors.co.uk, yet in my mozbar it has 0 links, 0 DA etc, I noticed it top a few weeks ago and thought something spammy was going on; I thought if I was patient, Google would remove it, however it still hasn't. Can someone explain how it is top in the SERPs? I've never seen this before. thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | TobiasM0 -
Being dragged to look spammy? Rand please help!
From nowhere a backlink to our website has appeared that looks creepy and spammy to us. More astonishing is the fact that our analytics has recorded 477 visits within one day and all the visits are from different places in Vietnam. Here's the link http://erpsoftware99.com/batchmaster-erp-software.htmlWhat should we do? Will Google hold us responsible for this?Thanks & Regards
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | IM_Learner0
