Duplicate, submitted URL not selected as canonical
-
Hi all,
A number of our pages have dropped out of search rankings.
It seems they are being marked as "Duplicate, submitted URL not selected as canonical"
However, the page Google is choosing as the canonical is totally different - different headings, titles, metadata, content on the page.
We are completely mystified as to why this is happening. If anyone can shed any light, it would be hugely appreciated!
Example URL is this one:
https://www.vouchedfor.co.uk/IFA-financial-advisor-mortgage/londonWhich Google seems to think is a duplicate of this: https://www.vouchedfor.co.uk/solicitor/london
-
Hi Eric. I took a look at your two pages. When I look at the page source (not with "inspect", but with "view page source"), I see that all of the content on your page is injected via javascript. There is almost no html for the page. To me, this looks like for whatever reason, Google isn't able to execute and parse the content being injected by javascript, and so when it crawls just the html, it is seeing the two pages as duplicate because the body of the content (in html page source) is mostly identical.
That does raise a question of why Google isn't able to parse the content of the scripts. Historically, Google just didn't execute the scripts. Now it does, but they acknowledge that content injected by scripts may not always ben indexed. As well, if scripts take too long to execute for the bot, then again, the content may not be indexed.
My recommendation would be to find some ways to have some unique html per page (not just the script content).
-
Hi Eric,
You can try to add unique content to each page and request reindexing via GSC.
-
Hi Eric,
This could be a different problem than just your canonical URL pointing to be something different, which is different from your HEAD canonical tag on these pages. What type of keywords are you checking this against, because that actually drives more input into what Google is seeing as a better version?
Martijn.
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
-
Canonical for duplicate pages in ecommerce site and the product out of stock
I’m an SEO for an ecommerce site that sells shoes I have duplicate pages for different colors of the same product (unique URL for each color), Conventionally I have added canonical tags for each page, which direct to a specific product URL My question is what happens when a product which the googlbot is direct to, is out of stock but is still listed in the canonical tag ?
Technical SEO | | shoesonline0 -
Numbers in URL
Hey guys! Need your many awesome brains. 🙂 This may be a very basic question but am hoping you can help me out with some insights beyond "because Google says it's better". 🙂 I only recently started working with SEO, and I work for a SaaS website builder company that has millions of open/active user sites, and all our user sites URLs, instead of www.mydomainname.com/gallery or myusername.simplesite.com/about, we use numbers, so www.mysite.com/453112 or myusername.simplesite.com/426521 The Sales manager has asked me to figure out if it will pay off for us in terms of traffic (other benefits?) to change it from the number system to the "proper" and right way of setting up these URLs. He's looking for rather concrete answers, as he usually sits with paid search and is therefore used to the mindset of "if we do x it will yield us y in z months". I'm finding it quite difficult to find case studies/other concrete examples beyond the generic, vague implication that it will simply be "better" (when for example looking at SEO checklists and search engine guidelines). Will it make a difference? How so? I have to convince our developers of the importance and priority of this adjustment, or it will just drown in the many projects they already have. So truly, any insights would be so very welcome. Thank you!
Technical SEO | | michelledemaree2 -
Multilingual -> ahref lang, canonical and duplicated title content
Hi all! We have our site eurasmus.com where we are implementing the multilingual.
Technical SEO | | Eurasmus.com
We have already available english and spanish and we use basically href lang to control different areas. First question: When a page is not translated but still is visible in both langauges under /en and /es is it enough with the hreflang or should we
add a canonical as well? Nowadays we are apply href lang and only canonicals to the one which are duplicated
in the same language. Second question: When some pages are not translated, like http://eurasmus.com/en/info/find-intern-placement-austria and http://eurasmus.com/es/info/find-intern-placement-austria,
we are setting up the href lang but still moz detects title and meta duplicated (not duplicate page content).
What do you suggest we should do? Let me know and thank you before hand for your help!0 -
Rel=canonical overkill on duplicate content?
Our site has many different health centers - many of which contain duplicate content since there is topic crossover between health centers. I am using rel canonical to deal with this. My question is this: Is there a tipping point for duplicate content where Google might begin to penalize a site even if it has the rel canonical tags in place on cloned content? As an extreme example, a site could have 10 pieces of original content, but could then clone and organize this content in 5 different directories across the site each with a new url. This would ultimately result in the site having more "cloned" content than original content. Is this at all problematic even if the rel canonical is in place on all cloned content? Thanks in advance for any replies. Eric
Technical SEO | | Eric_Lifescript0 -
Canonical Issue?
Hi, I was using the On Page Report Card Tool here on SEOMOZ for the following page: http://www.priceline.com/eventi-a-kimpton-hotel-new-york-city-new-york-ny-1614979-hd.hotel-reviews-hotel-guides and it claims there is a canonical issue or improper use of it. I looked at the element and it seems to be fine: <link rel="canonical" href="http://www.priceline.com/eventi-a-kimpton-hotel-new-york-city-new-york-ny-1614979-hd.hotel-reviews-hotel-guides" /> Can you spot the issue and how it would be fixed? Thanks. Eddy
Technical SEO | | workathomecareers0 -
Shorter URLs
Hi Is there a real value in having the keywords in the URL structure? we could use the URL: Mybrand.com/software/tablets/ipad/supertrader.html Or instead have the CMS create the shorter version mybrand.com/supertrader.html and just optimize this page for the keyword 'supertrader ipad software'
Technical SEO | | FXDD1 -
Rel=Canonical
Any downsides to adding the rel=canonical tag to the canonical page itself? It will make it easier for us to implement based on the way our site's templates work. For example, we would add to the page http://www.mysite.com/original-page.aspx The canonical tag would also appear on other dupe pages like: http://www.mysite.com/original-page.aspx?ref=93929299 http://www.mysite.com/original-page.aspx?ref=view29199292 etc
Technical SEO | | SoulSurfer80 -
Query string in url - duplicate content?
Hi everyone I would appreciate some advice on the following. I have a page which has some nice content on but it also has a search functionality. When a search is run a querystrong is run. So i will get something like mypage.php?id=20 etc. With many different url potentials, will each query string be seen as a different page? If so i don't want duplicate content. So am i best putting canonical tags in the head tags on mypage.php ? to avoid Google seeing potential duplicate content. Many thanks for all your advice.
Technical SEO | | pauledwards0
