Canonical tags
-
Hi there,
I have just noticed that SEOmoz picked up some duplicates links that I would like to resolve but not sure how.
For example, the "Finding work in the arts" article has two links:
- http://www.creative-choices.co.uk/develop-your-career/article/finding-work-in-the-arts
- http://www.creative-choices.co.uk/develop-your-career/article/finding-work-in-the-arts?utm_source=Website&utm_medium=Website&utm_content=Finding+work+in+the+arts&utm_campaign=Footer+Links
Both links can be found on this page http://www.creative-choices.co.uk/industry-news-views/article/what-employers-are-looking-for (see attachment).
Would automatically generated canonical tags by the CMS solve this issue?
-
Thanks for you reply Alan.
-
Yes, I would recommend having the field available so you can add it when needed, but not on every page automatically.
Also, all of Alan's advise is very good, as well as irving's. Hope it helps!
-Dan
-
No really, in robots you can block one of them, but that does not stop people from linking to both.
By far the best is not to have 2 urls
next is a 301,
then a canonical
and last would be to use robots.txt
-
Hi
I am having the same issue at the moment but mine is one page with a friendly url and the other has the CMS page id.
From looking into this I think a canonical tag is needed but I think you can do the robots.txt as well.
-
I can not tell you, as i dont use a cms.
but this is the format
-
Also go into google webmster tools and add the parameters to the parameter handling tool and set the instructions for how you want Google to deal with the specific parameters in your URLs
-
Hi Alan,
Yes, one page, 2 urls (to test which link placement generates more clicks).
How do I place the canonical tag in a CMS driven website? Should we ask the developer to automatically generate canonical tags for pages or perhaps an extra text field to be used when a canonical tags needs to be added?
-
you mean one page 2 urls. then put the tag in the one page, point to the one original url
-
Hi Alan,
Thanks for the reply and explanation.
There is only one entry in the CMS for the article in question (http://www.creative-choices.co.uk/develop-your-career/article/finding-work-in-the-arts).
The other longer URL (http://www.creative-choices.co.uk/develop-your-career/article/finding-work-in-the-arts?utm_source=Website&utm_medium=Website&utm_content=Finding+work+in+the+arts&utm_campaign=Footer+Links) just has google analytic tracking appended to it.
-
Hi Dan,
We are using Expression Engine CMS.
Would you then recommend asking the developer to make an extra field available to capture the canonical url to be used when needed?
-
3 things you could do, in order or preference
1. Correct urls to be the same
2. 301 1 to the other
3 canonical tag one to the other.
I want to make sure you understand how to make the canonical tags. you need to decided what url is tyhe original.(that would be the shorter of the 2) then the other page should have a canonical tag pointing to the original
-
Hi
You should definitely be using the canonical tag for that page. As far as site wide, I wouldn't recommend to just add it automatically on every page. What CMS are you using? There should be a way to control what pages it gets added to, you wouldn't want it applied when it shouldn't be.
-Dan
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 For Landing Pages
We have PPC landing pages that are also ranking in organic search. We've decided to create new landing pages that have been improved to rank better in natural search. The PPC team however wants to use their original landing pages so we are unable to 301 these pages to the new pages being created. We need to block the old PPC pages from search. Any idea if we can use rel=canonical? The difference between old PPC page and new landing page is much more content to support keyword targeting and provide value to users. Google says it's OK to use rel=canonical if pages are similar but not sure if this applies to us. The old PPC pages have 1 paragraph of content followed by featured products for sale. The new pages have 4-5 paragraphs of content and many more products for sale. The other option would be to add meta noindex to the old PPC landing pages. Curious as to what you guys think. Thanks.
Technical SEO | | SoulSurfer80 -
Updated Title Tag preference
Hi, This was a topic a couple years ago https://moz.com/community/q/title-tag-use-comma-pipe-or-colon I was wondering if there was any update on this as the consensus on this thread seemed to say using a pipe as a separator is best, but in Moz's title tag recommendations it has hyphen and pipe Primary Keyword - Secondary Keyword | Brand Name Does anyone know if using a pipe | between the primary keyword and secondary has adverse effects? Also, does removing the brand name for the sake of length hurt you in any way? Thanks for the help!
Technical SEO | | AliMac260 -
Should I keep writing about the same using rel canonical?
Hi, The service we provide has not so many searches per month. A long tail keyword that describes the service well has at the most 400 searches per month. We wrote a post for this keyword and we ranked number 1 for many months. Now we're on page 2 and I the truth is we stopped writing blog posts because we were raking well for our best keywords. I added a few new posts and lost ranking on my top keywords so I gave up, deleted them and recover the rankings for the keywords I wanted the most. The problem is that I have lost these positions and I know we're supposed to be updating the blog regularly. What would you suggest? Should we keep writing about the same thing and use rel canonical? There aren't that many keywords related to what we offer. I appreciate any ideas.
Technical SEO | | Naix0 -
Unique use of nofollow tag
Love the community here. I just had a quick question about the using noindex, nofollow. We are a car dealership group that uses a website provider (cobalt). Since they provide the website they are the only ones with access to remove pages etc. We can add pages but only they can remove them. There are some pages we need to have removed but according to them they are unable to remove them, (I think the manufacture might mandate having some pages), anyway some of these pages literally have nothing on them, and there isn't really any useful content we could add to them. So we are using noindex on them to ensure that they stay out of search indices, but I am wondering if we should also use nofollow on them. If I understand nofollow correctly it just means search engines won't follow the links on the page, well for most of these pages the only links on them are the navigation, and since we don't plan on adding any content to these pages and we can't remove them should we use noindex and nofollow as a way to "remove" them from the site as much as we can?
Technical SEO | | Murdock_Auto_Group0 -
Canonical question
I have at least three duplicate main pages on my website: www.augustbullocklaw.com www.augustbullocklaw.com/index augustbullocklaw.com I want the first one, www.augustbullocklaw.com to be the main page. I put this code on the index page and uploaded it to my site: http://www.augustbullocklaw.com/canonical-version-of-page/" rel="canonical" /> This code now appears on all three pages shown above. Did I do this correctly? I surmise that www.augustbullocklaw.com is pointing to itself. Is that ok? I don't know how to take the cononical code off the page that is the page I want to be the main page. (I don't know how to remove it from www.augustbullocklaw.com, but leave it on www.augustbullocklaw.com/index and augustbullocklaw.com) Thanks
Technical SEO | | Augster990 -
Why is the ideal rel canonical URL structure?
I currently have the rel canonical point to wepay.com/donations/123456. Is it worth the effort making it point to wepay.com/donations/donation-name-123456? I would also need to track histories if users change the vanity URL with this new structure.
Technical SEO | | wepayinc0 -
Canonicals for Real Estate
A real estate site has a landing page for a particular zip code: site.com/zip/99999 On this page, there are links which add arguments to the URL, resulting in structures like this: site.com/zip/99999?maxprice=1000000&maxbeds=3 My question is on using a canonical URL for the pages with arguments. These pages may have lots of duplicate content, so should I direct search engines back to the base URL for the search? (site.com/zip/99999) A side note is that these pages with arguments could have no listings returned (no listings found) or could come back with listings (then it wouldn't be duplicate), but that can change on a day to day basis.
Technical SEO | | SteveCastaneda0 -
Google +1 not recognizing rel-canonical
So I have a few pages with the same content just with a different URL. http://nadelectronics.com/products/made-for-ipod/VISO-1-iPod-Music-System http://nadelectronics.com/products/speakers/VISO-1-iPod-Music-System http://nadelectronics.com/products/digital-music/VISO-1-iPod-Music-System All pages rel-canonical to:
Technical SEO | | kevin4803
http://nadelectronics.com/products/made-for-ipod/VISO-1-iPod-Music-System My question is... why can't google + (or facebook and twitter for that matter) consolidate all these pages +1. So if the first two had 5 +1 and the rel-canonical page had 5 +1's. It would be nice for all pages to display 15 +1's not 5 on each. It's my understanding that Google +1 will gives the juice to the correct page. So why not display all the +1's at the same time. Hope that makes sense.0