This one is complicated... canonicals, href lang tags and no index
-
Bear with me, this is complicated (I REALLY hope one of you comes along and says, no it isn't!)
Scenario
A client has multiple english pages, as they have a unique product offering in AUS, US, UK, NZ and also have a global site in english.
Obviously there is a lot of duplicate content and they have the relevant href lang tags set-up to help Google untangle what should be ranked where. They also have rel-canonical on each page.
I've set-up search console for each of the folder structures, i.e. en-us, en-gb, en-au and so on.
They have an optimised page for one of their primary keywords, which ranks nowhere for this exact keyword, but this page DOES rank for 40 similar keywords.
For the exact keyword, they rank 52nd, and frustratingly, it's the homepage that ranks.
We know the correct page is ranking and is indexed because search console tells us so and we see the exact page appear in SERPs for the other 40 keywords.
When I look at the en-us site in Search Console, it tells me that the home page is not being indexed, because a rel canonical tag is prioritising an alternative page (probably the global site) - however, the en-us homepage is showing up in rankings for a lot of their important keywords.
The site has been live for 6 months and the optimised page for about 3 months.
Questions
1. If search console is saying the homepage is not ranking, how is it showing up in SERPs?
2. Why is the homepage ranking for this important keyword, when there is virtually no mention of the keyword versus the page that is almost perfect according to Moz's on-page grader?
3. Do you need href lang tags AND rel canonical on a page?
4. How long before a new page that is optimised for a keyword take to replace (and hopefully surpass) the homepage?
5. If the US is the most important market, should we guide Google to that fact using rel-canonical?Really appreciate your feedback, hivemind.
Thanks
-
1. Search Console tells you, that they use a canonical for the homepage, that doesn't mean John Mueller is talking about that in this webmaster hangout (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAagTHeF9N0)
2. I can just guess, think it could be a structure thing, and maybe it is to fresh - 6 month old site with several regions set-up in same language. So a lot of duplicates, canonicals aso Google has to deal with. And of course, Homepage is strong, your landingpage may not be strong enaugh. And whatever happens on Googles Page 5 is more or less useless data. If it still happens when you are on page 2, guess than there is a real problem. At the moment, without knowing anything, asuming hreflangs, canonicals are right, think it is a structure, time, pagerank combined thing.
3. You can use canonicals and it depends, if you need them, you need them - no matter if hreflang in use or not. You have to send the same signals, not confusing once. I think here is helpful stuf about hreflang and canonicals working together (https://www.searchviu.com/en/hreflang-canonical/)
4. It depends on depth, difficulty, and a lot more factors. I cant say anything here without topic or domain / page
5. You use hreflang, so you tell google what to rank where. Sending confusing signals (hreflang to a page wich has a canonical to anywhere wich has an hreflang-back to that page. Nice confusing chain... ) google will start to ignore your canonicals in this case
Hope that helps a bit
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
-
Help With Href Lang Implementation
Hi, We've received the following Href Lang errors in Google Search Console. After much research and playing around with the tags we're still no closer to fixing the issues. ERRORS; http://prntscr.com/du8ei8 AND http://prntscr.com/du8evi As you'll see, Google is telling us that some URLs do not have return tags, but they do seem to! Does anyone know of a pro that can provide a service to fix this for us? Many thanks in advance, Lee.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Webpresence0 -
SEO Indexing issues
Hi, We have been submitting sitemaps on a weekly basis for couple of months now and only 40% of the submitted pages are indexed each time. Whether on the design , content or technical side, the website doesn't violate google guidelines.Can someone help me find the issue? website: http://goo.gl/QN5CevThanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ZeFan0 -
301s Or Stick With Canonical?
Hello all! A nice interesting one for you on this fine Friday... I have some pages which are accessible by 2 different urls - This is for user experience allowing the user to get to these pages in two different ways. To keep Google happy we have a rel canonical so that Google only sees one of these urls to avoid duplicates. After some SEO work I need to change both of these urls (on around 1,000 pages). Is the best way to do this... To 301 every old url to every new url Or... To not worry as I will just point the indexed pages to the new rel canonical? Any ideas or suggestions would be brilliant. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HB170 -
To index or de-index internal search results pages?
Hi there. My client uses a CMS/E-Commerce platform that is automatically set up to index every single internal search results page on search engines. This was supposedly built as an "SEO Friendly" feature in the sense that it creates hundreds of new indexed pages to send to search engines that reflect various terminology used by existing visitors of the site. In many cases, these pages have proven to outperform our optimized static pages, but there are multiple issues with them: The CMS does not allow us to add any static content to these pages, including titles, headers, metas, or copy on the page The query typed in by the site visitor always becomes part of the Title tag / Meta description on Google. If the customer's internal search query contains any less than ideal terminology that we wouldn't want other users to see, their phrasing is out there for the whole world to see, causing lots and lots of ugly terminology floating around on Google that we can't affect. I am scared to do a blanket de-indexation of all /search/ results pages because we would lose the majority of our rankings and traffic in the short term, while trying to improve the ranks of our optimized static pages. The ideal is to really move up our static pages in Google's index, and when their performance is strong enough, to de-index all of the internal search results pages - but for some reason Google keeps choosing the internal search results page as the "better" page to rank for our targeted keywords. Can anyone advise? Has anyone been in a similar situation? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FPD_NYC0 -
Novice Question - Can Browsers realistically distinguish words within concatenated strings e.g. text55fun or should one use text-55-fun? What about foreign languages especially more obscure ones like Finnish which Google Translate often miss-translates?
I am attempting to understand what is realistically possible within Google, Yahoo and Bing as they search websites for KeyWords. Technically my understanding is that they should be able to distinguish common words within concatenated strings, although there can be confusion between word boundaries when ambiguity is involved. So in the simple example of text55fun, do search engines actually distinguish text, 55 and fun separately? There are practical processing, databased and algorithm limitations that might turn a technically possible solution into a unrealistic one at a commercial scale. What about more ambiguous strings like stringsstrummingstrongly would that be parsed as string s strummings trongly or strings strummings trongly or strings strumming strongly? Does one need to use dashes or underscores to make it unambiguous to the search engine? My guess is that the engine would recognize the dash or space and better understand the word boundaries yet ignore the dash or underscore from an overall concatenated string perspective. Thanks in advance to whoever can provide any insight to an old coder who is new to this field.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ny600 -
Content not indexed
How come i google content that resides on my website and on my homepage and my site doesn't come up? I know the content is unique i wrote that. I have a feeling i have some kind of a crawling issue but cannot determine what it is. I ran the crawling test and other tools and didn't find anything. Google shows me that pages are indexed but yet its weird try googling snippets of content and you'll see my site isnt anywhere. Have you experienced that before? First i thought it was penalized but i submitted the reconsideration request and it came back clear, No manual spam action found. And i did not get any message in my GWMT either. Any thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CMTM0 -
Rel=canonical tag on original page?
Afternoon All,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jellyfish-Agency
We are using Concrete5 as our CMS system, we are due to change but for the moment we have to play with what we have got. Part of the C5 system allows us to attribute our main page into other categories, via a page alaiser add-on. But what it also does is create several url paths and duplicate pages depending on how many times we take the original page and reference it in other categories. We have tried C5 canonical/SEO add-on's but they all seem to fall short. We have tried to address this issue in the most efficient way possible by using the rel=canonical tag. The only issue is the limitations of our cms system. We add the canonical tag to the original page header and this will automatically place this tag on all the duplicate pages and in turn fix the problem of duplicate content. The only problem is the canonical tag is on the original page as well, but it is referencing itself, effectively creating a tagging circle. Does anyone foresee a problem with the canonical tag being on the original page but in turn referencing itself? What we have done is try to simplify our duplicate content issues. We have over 2500 duplicate page issues because of this aliasing add-on and want to automate the canonical tag addition, rather than go to each individual page and manually add this tag, so the original reference page can remain the original. We have implemented this tag on one page at the moment with 9 duplicate pages/url's and are monitoring, but was curious if people had experienced this before or had any thoughts?0 -
Sitemap not indexing pages
My website has about 5000 pages submitted in the sitemap but only 900 being indexed. When I checked Google Webmaster Tools about a week ago 4500 pages were being indexed. Any suggestions about what happened or how to fix it? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | theLotter0