Many canonical warnings. Is this a problem?
-
My site has over 80 canonical warnings. The report states the url is for example http://www.musicliveuk.com and the 'tag value' column says http://www.musicliveuk.com/ Is that a good thing? I'm new to seo and am running my site on wordpress with all in one seo pack. Does this mean the seo pack has automatically added canonical tags to my pages? If so why is it showing as an error? I am also getting lots of 301 permanent redirects and I haven't set any up manually. I'm getting them for every page on my site from the normal url to a url with a slash at the end.
-
Pleasure
-
Indeed I did have two plugins running... DOH!
Thanks guys.
-
Do you have multiple SEO plugins running? Maybe the template has canonical settings out the box?
See lines 65 & 82on the home page.. there are 2.. I'm leaning towards template if I had to guess
-
Thanks guys. I also get warnings that some pages have more than one canonical tag. I don't add any manually and just use the all in one seo pack settings. How can this be and how do I fix it?
-
Agree with Vahe. Also, warnings are not necessarily errors but meant to raise flags for you to check the site to see if everything is meant to be there.
An incorrect rollout of canonicals (e.g. if every page on your site has the home page as the canonical) can result in a lot of pages being removed out of the index.
Regarding the 301s, check all pages for links to other internal pages & look at any links that have a trailing slash at the end and change to remove the trailing slash, e.g. these are 2 different URLs:
- http://www.musicliveuk.com/category/planning-events
- http://www.musicliveuk.com/category/planning-events/
Yet "/category/planning-events/" 301s to "/category/planning-events"
The non www version 301s to the www version too.. so check if there are any internal links to:
and change to:
-
There's nothing wrong. The wordpress SEO pack is actually doing the right thing to ensure search engines like Google see only one version (and the right version) of your website, this being with the www. with the /.
If your site didn't do what you had mentioned above, search engines would have indexed (listed) what they thought was the right version. There are also other several disadvantages to this:
(1) The page rank (domain authority) would be split between the www and non www versions of the site. Some would go even further and say that it would cause site duplication, which is not favoured by search engines.
(2) People linking to your site would not link to one URL version. Again this would cause spreading the link juice.
Since there are the proper 301 redirects on your site, no matter which version people link to, it will go back to the www version with the /. Just make sure that in Bing and Google Webmaster tools you also change your preferred domain settings to the www version.
Hope this helps,
Vahe
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
-
Google Search - One page having problems
this issue is concerning my site - cruvoir.com we retail designer clothing online, and currently have 17 'designer' pages - one for each manufacturer brand name. We target these brand names for our campaign and track the progress with Moz and try to focus them in Google search. Of many of the designer names, we rank pretty well in Google search (usually under #15 when searching for the specific brand. All brands are doing well, except one brand : "Lost And Found" - a designer label we carry. This is the page for this brand name : https://cruvoir.com/5-lost-and-found we cannot figure it out. It happens to be our most important label we carry. when we search for this brand name or include it in any other search terms, we never are in the google search results. I expect it is a crawl issue, but we have covered all our ground in optimizing this brand page. It seems this page is also indexed with Google. But we cannot figure out why it does not rank us in search.
On-Page Optimization | | cruvoir0 -
Opinions please on Duplicate page titles & too many on-page links warnings.-
Hello folks, I'm a total SEO newbe but totally enjoying
On-Page Optimization | | CSC
using SEOmoz to learn more. We have ecommerce sites and the 1st crawl flags – as appears typical too many on-page links. We display up to 20 products (each with three links!)
and I’m trying to push to have fewer but meeting resistance from colleagues.
We have links duplicated all over the site believing it eases navigation. My question is just how critical is the number of products displayed
and the resulting volume of links to SEO results? Also we currently have collections of products displayed
across several pages which of course have the same page title and this is flagged
as a duplication error. I wonder if product auto-scrolling help as this means only a certain number of products are displayed at one time on one page thus reducing links and the need for duplicate page titles? My superiors are resisting change (perhaps nervous of spoiling
what already works) and I need to know where to direct my persuasive powers! Many thanks in anticipation, Spence0 -
Site wide 301 or canonical links.
Hi guys, I'd like add code to my header file to specify www. as opposed to just http:// for the canonical links across my entire site. How can I do this? I'd like it to be site wide code that I can just add to my header.php file which is included across the site.
On-Page Optimization | | absoauto0 -
Issue: Rel Canonical
My SEO Report shows issues: Rel Canonical I have a wordpress website each page has its content but I'm getting errors from my SEOMOZ report. I instaledl the yoast plug in to fix the issue but I'm still getting 29 errors. Wordpress 3.4.1
On-Page Optimization | | mobiledudes0 -
Canonical URL Tag
Hi, I have two pages that are identical on my site: http://www.absolutepower.nl/creatine-monohydraat and http://www.absolutepower.nl/CREATINE/creatine-monohydraat Should I use the canonical URL tag in this case? Thanks, Jasper
On-Page Optimization | | Japking0 -
Problem with left navigation links on an e-commerce site diluting pagerank
I'm trying to decide how to deal with left navigation links on my e-commerce website diluting the amount of link juice passed to other links on the page. Any suggestions? Only options I can think of are: Nofollow the links use javascript (I'm assuming googlebots are still able to find these) Leave them as they are as followed links
On-Page Optimization | | Ralzaider0 -
On my site, www.myagingfolks.com, only a small number of my pages appear to be indexed by google or yahoo. Is that due to not having an XML sitemap, keywords, or some other problem?
On my site, www.myagingfolks.com, only a small number of my pages appear to be indexed by google or yahoo. I have thousands of pages! Is that due to not having an XML sitemap, keywords, or some other problem?
On-Page Optimization | | Jordanrg0 -
Lots of links on homepage to internal pages with keyword rich anchor text - problem?
Hi, All! We have a new potential client, that when looking at his site with a tool, we noticed that the previous SEO company they worked with filled the homepage copy with lots of keyword-rich anchor text links pointing to different pages on the site - many links going to the same page, just with different keywords. These links are not indistinguishable in format from the other text, which is why we only noticed it with a tool. I certainly wouldn't recommend doing that to start with, but once all these links are there, would you recommend taking them down? Is there any conceivable chance it could help the site? Is there a significant reason to think it will harm the site? Or will it just be pretty neutral? In all that's been written (much by SEOMoz) about only the first link's anchor text counting, do subsequent links work like a no-follow in the sense that they are a waste of the link-juice of the page, or is it as if they aren't there at all? (And is "only the first link counts" still the most widely held theory, or have there been new developments since?) Thanks, All!
On-Page Optimization | | debi_zyx0
