Canonical error from Google
-
Moz couldn't explain this properly and I don't understand how to fix it. Google emailed this morning saying "Alternate page with proper canonical tag." Moz also kinda complains about the main URL and the main URL/index.html being duplicate. Of course they are. The main URL doesn't work without the index.html page. What am I missing? How can I fix this to eliminate this duplicate problem which to me isn't a problem?
-
where is my post?
-
Duplicate Content Issue:
Having duplicate content on your website can be problematic for search engines like Google. It can lead to confusion about which page should be ranked and indexed, potentially affecting your site's search engine rankings.Canonicalization:
Canonicalization is a method used to inform search engines about the preferred version of a page when multiple versions of the same content exist. It helps prevent duplicate content issues and consolidates the ranking signals for the same content.Based on your description, it seems you have a situation where the main URL and the main URL/index.html are both accessible and show the same content. While you mentioned it's not an issue for you because the main URL doesn't work without the index.html page, it's still considered best practice to handle this properly for SEO reasons.
-
@RVForce (1) Your main URL variant should have a self referencing canonical. (2) Your index.html page variant should have a canonical tag pointing at the main URL variant.
On both pages, use:
e.g. <link rel="canonical" href="https://www.example.com/" /> -
We have our mobile website as a subfolder. Is this the correct way to use canonical tags
main website <link rel="canonical" href="https://www.example.com/" />
mobile subfolder mobile <link rel="canonical" href="https://www.example.com/mobile" />Our primary website https://www.example.com and our mobile website https://www.example.com/mobile is a subfolder.
Is this the correct way to use "canonical" tags
main website <link rel="canonical" href="https://www.example.com/" />
mobile subfolder mobile <link rel="canonical" href="https://www.example.com/mobile" />
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
-
Rel: Canonical - checking advice provided by SEO agency
Hey all, We have two brands one bigger and one smaller that are on 2 different domains. We are wanting to repost some of the articles from the smaller brand to the bigger brand and what was a bit of curve ball, our SEO agency advised us NOT to put a rel: canonical on the reposted articles on the bigger brands site. This is counter to what i'm used to and just wanted to confirm with the gurus out there if this is good advice or bad advice. Thanks 🙂
Technical SEO | | Redooo0 -
Virtual URL Google not indexing?
Dear all, We have two URLs: The main URL which is crawled both by GSC and where Moz assigns our keywords is: https://andipaeditions.com/banksy/ The second one is called a virtual url by our developpers: https://andipaeditions.com/banksy/signedandunsignedprintsforsale/ This is currently not indexed by Google. We have been linking to the second URL and I am unable to see if this is passing juice/anything on to the main one /banksy/ Is it a canonical? The /banksy/ is the one that is being picked up in serps/by Moz and worry that the two similar URLs are splitting the signal. Should I redirect from the second to the first? Thank you
On-Page Optimization | | TAT1000 -
Unsolved Moz is showing a canonical error that dont belong.
Hi guys, and thanks for this excellent source of information. i have an issue with the moz system because is telling to me that i dont have canonical instructions but i have canonical instructions on all my pages, so... im confused because maybe im not understanding what the system want to show to me. if you can help me i will be very gratefull. here you can see a page that have the canonical instruction. https://drive.google.com/file/d/14U_-Sgu_NQaB7kMBH3AguHQMHyHX9L8X/view?usp=sharing and here you can see what is reporting to me the MOZ system. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pqgSC-V9WOyBPvQEr06pbqpLf_w7-q8J/view?usp=sharing this is happening on 19 pages, and all the 19 pages have the canonical instruction.
On-Page Optimization | | b-lab
thanks in advance guys.0 -
Google Ecommerce Alerts
I recently started getting email notifications from Google re: new products on our websites. I am subscribed to Google alerts. Can anyone shed some light on this?
Technical SEO | | AMHC0 -
Google Enterprise Search Questions
Hi Everybody, A client has asked me to take a look at Google Enterprise Search for them. It has been a few years since I last fooled around with implementing a Google search box on a website, and that was the free version which included off-site results in the results. This appears to be the main page describing the paid product: http://www.google.com/enterprise/search/ I have three questions: The search testing function on the above page doesn't seem to be working. I'm typing in a URL and search term, as prompted, and the page is simply refreshing. It never provides me an example set of results. Is it working for you? This client has a moderately large e-commerce site (about 200 products). Have you implemented Google enterprise search on such a site and are you happy with its performance? The goal here is to let users search for a topic and be returned both product and informational pages. How well does this tool do this? Am I going to need to know any special types of coding (beyond html/css) to implement this? If so, what are they? If you have experience with this product, I would surely appreciate your feedback. Thank you!
Technical SEO | | MiriamEllis0 -
Help! Getting 5XX error
Keep getting a 5XX error and my site is obviously losing ranking, Asked the hoster. Nobody seems to know what is wrong. Site is www.monteverdetours.com I know this is probably an obvious problem and easy to fix but I don't know how to do it! Any comments will be greatly appreciated.
Technical SEO | | Llanero0 -
Penalized by google. How to find out?
Our webpage performs very bad on some keywords relating to one product. At the SeoMoz-ranking page i can se we are number 9 but we have the highest (higher than our competitors) rating in almost every category (at least 25 of 30) on the keyword difficulty report. How do i find out why this is so, or if we have been penalized by google?On other search-engines (yahoo, bing etc) we are number one! And we have the highest pagerank among the competitors...
Technical SEO | | alsvik0 -
Rel-canonical tag
Hi, I'm having some confusion with the rel-canonical tag. A few months ago we implemented the rel-canonical tag because we had many errors specifically duplicate page content come upon the SEOmoz web app (mostly because we use tracking code). I had asked what to do about this and was advised by the SEOmoz web app to implement the rel-canonical tag. However, when I'm working on the Keyword Optimizer Tool, it always checks off that I'm using the rel-canonical tag improperly, and then when I go into our sites' CMS for that page and uncheck "Use Canonical URL", the keyword optimizer tool up's my grade for that correction/that I've made an improvement. So my question is if the page I'm working on is the one I want search engines to find, should I not be using the Canonical URL tag? Should the Canonical URL tag only be used on URL's with the tracking code?
Technical SEO | | aircyclemegan0