canonical URL tag
-
Hello,
I was checking my ON page SEO,
and one of the things i see
Number of Canonical tags 2
Remove all but a single canonical URL tag
I didn't fully understand, what is canonical URL tag?
my website is http://novitasalonandspa.com
Thanks for help
-
It's usually automatic. So you might've have a plugin like SEO all in one or Yoast that added the canonical URL.
I'm guessing thats the reason.
-
Thanks a lot, it was in the header so i removed it,
so is it something that i have to do it all the time?
how this ended up in the header anyways?
Thanks again big help!
-
I can't remember off the top of my head but I believe it should be in sidebar when in wp-admin.
It should be under EDIT or Template. It is where it shows you all the HTML and CSS files. You can just go into 'yourtemplatename.html' and look for the canonical link and remove it.
The page you do that in has a big text box and on the right side a list of all the HTML and CSS files. I believe that is the spot, I don't have access to any WP domain ATM so can't give you direct names and tabs. But its there.
-
Hello, Im really appreciate for detailed answer.
But how do i find these "canonical tags" in wp because seomoz tells me i have 2?
Thanks again
-
Hello, Im really appreciate for detailed answer.
But how do i find these "canonical tags" in wp because seomoz tells me i have 2?
Thanks again
-
A canonical tag is to tell the search engines which version of the page should be indexed. Each page should have only one. For example, let's say http://www.example.com/index.php and http://www.example.com/index.php?utm=whatever are the exact same page except with different URLs, you will put the following canonical tag in the HEAD of this page -
This tells the search engines to ignore http://www.example.com/index.php?utm=whatever so they don't put that URL in the search engine results instead of your actual homepage.
-
That means you have two canonical tags in your code.
Canonical tags basically means which link is the primary link. This prevents Google from affecting your rankings due to duplicate pages.
I.E.
Page 1 = Original Link
Page 2 = Similar to Page 1 - Could be mistaken as duplicate page
You put a Canonical tag for Page 2 and reference Page 1 as the original.
For Google's interpretation: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/02/specify-your-canonical.html
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
-
Moz Crawl Report more urls?
Hi. I have used Moz Crawl Test and get my 3,000 urls crawled no issue. However, my site has more than that, is it possible to crawl the entire website? Alot of the crawl urls in the Moz test are search string urls and filters so Ive probably wasted about 2,500 urls on filter urls. Any advise or alternative software that wont cost a fortune?
Moz Pro | | YNWA
Thanks0 -
Is The Number of Duplicate Pages reduced after adding canonical ref to the dupe versions ?
Hi Is the number of duplicate pages reported in a dupe page content error report reduced on subsequent crawls, if you have resolved the dupe content problem via adding the canonical tag to duplicate versions (referring the original page). Like it would if you were solving the problem via a 301 redirect (i think/presume) ? Cheers Dan
Moz Pro | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
Why do I see a duplicate content errors when rel="canonical" tag is present
I was reviewing my first Moz crawler report and noticed the crawler returned a bunch of duplicate page content errors. The recommendations to correct this issue are to either put a 301 redirect on the duplicate URL or use the rel="canonical" tag so Google knows which URL I view as the most important and the one that should appear in the search results. However, after poking around the source code I noticed all of the pages that are returning duplicate content in the eyes of the Moz crawler already have the rel="canonical" tag. Does the Moz crawler simply not catch whether that tag is being used? If I have that tag in place, is there anything else I need to do in order to get that error to stop showing up in the Moz crawler report?
Moz Pro | | shinolamoz0 -
Rel Canonical
hi folks sorry i really am confused and not very good with technical terms i have 553 Rel Canonical notices but i cant understand what Rel Canonical actually means it kinda sounds like there links that go nowhere to help the seo ranking? am i right or just in way over my head? please use the most basic language you can 🙂 cheers donal
Moz Pro | | homebrew10 -
Rel Canonical Question
Hi all. I think I'm a bit confused. When I check my crawl diagnostics its listing lots of warnings under the heading rel-canonical. I am not sure why, since virtually all my pages have the link rel="<a class="attribute-value">canonical</a>" tag. I use it because there are a lot of possible extensions that can appear on the pages as it is an eCommerce site. Why would seomoz list this as a warning? Thanks Ken
Moz Pro | | CandymanKen0 -
How to get past PA and DA value for a specific URL ?
Hi everyone, I was wondering if there is a way to get the past PA and DA value for a specific URL ? I did run a small SEO campaign targeting a couple of deep pages over a month on my site and I would like to measure the efficiency of this campaign but I forgot to write down what was the PA (I know more aloess the DA) of those pages before the starting the campaign. Is their a way to retrieve the historical data of PA/DA ? thanks
Moz Pro | | Gus_Martin0 -
Where do these URL's come from?! (Indexation issues)
We have an international webshop with languages in the URLs. Our URLs are now set up as follows: http://thermalunderwear.eu/eng/category/product Now, we know that there's some kind of strange redirect problem causing problems with our indexation, this is a technical issue that should be fixed soon. But whether this is the cause of some other strange problems, I do not know. I'd be happy with any help/advice/tips. 1. The SEOmoz site crawler starts at http://thermalunderwear.eu. This currently does not yet redirect to http://thermalunderwear.eu/eng like we want it to, but all the links on the page do include the default language code. So all links on the page are http://thermalunderwear.eu/eng/category etc. However, apart from those URLs, the site crawler finds many URLs in the form http://thermalunderwear.eu/category/product etc., so not including the language variable. Where it gets these I do not know, and since these URLs dont exist and the webshop simply shows the homepage, these URLs all have 50+ duplicate titles/content. Why oh why? 2. If I do a Google search for indexed URL's with English as language, I get many results formatted like this: Coldpruf Enthusiast mens thermal shirt - Thermal wear for men ...
Moz Pro | | DocdataCommerce
thermalunderwear.eu/eng/men/coldpruf-enthusiast-mens-thermal-shirt 170+ items – Fine-ribbed longsleeve thermal shirt men from Enthusiast ... {$SCRIPT_NAME} eng/men/coldpruf-enthusiast-mens-the {$ajax_url} http://thermalunderwear.eu/ajax What are those variables doing there? It looks like it's taking something from our Smarty debug console, which is hidden but still active in the source code, but also the ajax URL which is in a completely different location. What is Google trying to show here?0 -
Do crawl reports see canonical tags?
Greetings, I just redesigned my site, www.funderstanding.com, and have the old site pointing to the new site via canonical URLs. I had a new crawl test run and it showed a large amount of duplicate content. Does the SEO Moz crawl tool validate canonical urls and adjusts the duplicate content count or is this note considered? FYI, I sent from no duplicate content to having 865 errors since the redesign went up so that seems suspicious. I would think though that assuming the canonical tag were used properly, and I hope it is?, that this would not be a problem?? All help with this is most appreciated. Eric
Moz Pro | | Ericc220