Canonical tags and Syndicated Content
-
-
Good point. If a new domain is able to rank as well as the old site before the 301 redirects are put in place, that's very compelling evidence.
-
I agree with Kurt - in lieu of de-listing or redirects, rel=canonical is about your only option. It's possible it won't be enough, but it's the best you've got by a long shot, given the restrictions.
-
I haven't seen all the numbers, but I know people at major newspapers using cross-domain canonical, and they'd drop it in a heartbeat if it didn't pass the majority of link equity.
I think the domain move case is more compelling, because now you've got a completely new domain that you can show ranking in place of the old, stronger domain, without redirects in place. At that point, it's unlikely just a fluke.
-
Cool. I hadn't heard of using canonical tags to move sites. That's quite helpful.
I'm curious about the idea that the canonical tag passes link authority or PageRank. Is it possible that these tests people have done just look like that's what's happening? Here's what I mean. Let's say I write an article that gets reproduced on another site and Google is ranking the other site in the top ten for some keyword. Then I get the other site to put a canonical tag on their page and in a few days my site is ranking for that keyword. Now, does that indicate that any link authority was passed or does it indicate that Google would have ranked either site in the top ten for that keyword, but they had to decide on one or the other because they are duplicate. So, the canonical tag just caused Google to change it's mind about which site it would rank. In other words, could it be that both pages are authoritative enough to rank and the canonical tag is just telling Google which of the two should rank?
Has anyone done tests where one site had content for a while that didn't rank and then another more authoritative site re-published the content and ranked for it and then the authoritative site put a canonical tag to the original site and now that original site was able to rank well for the keyword? And when they did this, they would have to not have put a link to the original content only using the canonical.
-
Dave,
What you're describing is exactly what the canonical tag is for, reproducing content on pages, but giving credit to the original. Anyway, if 301's wouldn't work, what else would you do?
-
She essentially said that canonicals for moving a site was one of the intended uses. In her talk she gave the example of having an Exercise Blog and taking over Matt Cutts' Exercise blog... and how in that instance canonicals are a good way to notify the search engines that you would like your main site to start ranking for the instances where the secondary site would come up. (Plus the bits about good for the user experience) Then you would canonical all relevant pages as necessary, move any content that you would like to appear on the main site, and throw up a message on the secondary site with a link stating you're moving to the new URL. Then after a while you would 301 everything over.
I have actually given that advice to people regularly and (so far) no one has come back screaming at me that I ruined their site.
-
That actually makes much more sense than the way I've had people try to explain it to me
I didn't realize a Googler had actually condoned it (although sometimes I find Maile's messages a bit mixed).
-
I have done these and I agree completely.
Also, the bit about Canonicals to move a site and then 301 later was actually talked about at SMX by Maile Ohye of Google as a legitimate and good use for situations such as buying or taking over someone else's site as a means to pass link equity while also giving users a better experience by letting them know you are transitioning... giving them time to change their bookmarks instead of potentially causing them to bounce by sending them somewhere they didn't intend to go.
(though don't quote me on her saying anything about "link juice" or "link equity" specifically... it was about a year ago and its been ages since I've listened to my personal recordings of the session [and actually, i'm not sure I was even actually allowed to record while Google and Bing reps were speaking... but oh well])
-
So, I can tell you from conversations with SEOs that some have used rel=canonical successfully to pass link-juice. In some cases, I even know people who use it to move sites, and then 301 later, and claim success with this method. Unfortunately, almost none of those case studies are published.
Generally speaking, I still don't think it's a great way to move a resource, and tend toward 301s for that purpose, but all the data I've seen suggests that rel=canonical tends to consolidate link juice. There are exceptions, of course, such as when Google doesn't honor the tag (they don't see it as a duplicate, for example, and think you're trying to game the system), but that's true of 301s as well.
Rand did a Whiteboard Friday a couple of years ago talking about link-equity and cross-domain canonical:
http://moz.com/blog/cross-domain-canonical-the-new-301-whiteboard-friday
I know he's actually a big believer that rel=canonical passes link equity, as or more strongly in some cases than 301-redirects (again, it's pretty situational).
-
My understanding is that canonical tag only establishes the original location of content. It has nothing to do with PageRank. I've not seen anything from Google that would indicate that adding a canonical tag to a page will pass all it's authority to the canonical URL.
-
Hiya,I wouldn't look at it as a link juice argument as its really aimed at telling the search engine which concepts the original (which can be helpful if e.g you have multiple products etc.). What it can do is help build you up as an authority. Regards to auther credit it depends if they used the rel="author" tag (telling Google who the auther is).
Look at it another way you would use the tags for duplicate content, do you think a search engine would highly rank duplicate content? It would link one copy of the relevant result and you can use the tag to tell it "this is the original content" (i.e the most relevant).
You may find the following helpful : https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139394
as well a similar topic was posted only an hour ago http://moz.com/community/q/canonical-tag-refers-to-itself
I hope this has helped a bit for your question, good luck!
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
-
Understanding Redirects and Canonical Tags in SEO: A Complex Case
Hi everyone, nothing serious here, i'm just playing around doing my experiments 🙂
Technical SEO | | chueneke
but if any1 of you guys understand this chaos and what was the issue here, i'd appreciate if you try to explain it to me. I had a page "Linkaufbau" on my website at https://chriseo.de/linkaufbau. My .htaccess file contains only basic SEO stuff: # removed ".html" using htaccess RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} ^GET\ (.*)\.html\ HTTP RewriteRule (.*)\.html$ $1 [R=301,L] # internally added .html if necessary RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME}.html -f RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !/$ RewriteRule (.*) $1\.html [L] # removed "index" from directory index pages RewriteRule (.*)/index$ $1/ [R=301,L] # removed trailing "/" if not a directory RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} /$ RewriteRule (.*)/ $1 [R=301,L] # Here’s the first redirect: RedirectPermanent /index / My first three questions: Why do I need this rule? Why must this rule be at the top? Why isn't this handled by mod_rewrite? Now to the interesting part: I moved the Linkaufbau page to the SEO folder: https://chriseo.de/seo/linkaufbau and set up the redirect accordingly: RedirectPermanent /linkaufbau /seo/linkaufbau.html I deleted the old /linkaufbau page. I requested indexing for /seo/linkaufbau in the Google Search Console. Once the page was indexed, I set a canonical to the old URL: <link rel="canonical" href="https://chriseo.de/linkaufbau"> Then I resubmitted the sitemap and requested indexing for /seo/linkaufbau again, even though it was already indexed. Due to the canonical tag, the page quickly disappeared. I then requested indexing for /linkaufbau and /linkaufbau.html in GSC (the old, deleted page). After two days, both URLs were back in the serps:: https://chriseo.de/linkaufbau https://chriseo.de/linkaufbau.html this is the new page /seo/linkaufbau
b14ee095-5c03-40d5-b7fc-57d47cf66e3b-grafik.png This is the old page /linkaufbau
242d5bfd-af7c-4bed-9887-c12a29837d77-grafik.png Both URLs are now in the search results and all rankings are significantly better than before for keywords like: organic linkbuilding linkaufbau kosten linkaufbau service natürlicher linkaufbau hochwertiger linkaufbau organische backlinks linkaufbau strategie linkaufbau agentur Interestingly, both URLs (with and without .html) redirect to the new URL https://chriseo.de/seo/linkaufbau, which in turn has a canonical pointing to https://chriseo.de/linkaufbau (without .html). In the SERPs, when https://chriseo.de/linkaufbau is shown, my new, updated snippet is displayed. When /linkaufbau.html is shown, it displays the old, deleted page that had already disappeared from the index. I have now removed the canonical tag. I don't fully understand the process of what happened and why. If anyone has any ideas, I would be very grateful. Best regards,
Chris0 -
Is content on widget bar less 'seo important' than main content?
hi, i wonder if content on widget bar less 'seo important' than main content.. i mean, is better to place content and links on main cotent than on wordpress widget bar? What are the pros and cons? tx!
Technical SEO | | Dreamrealemedia0 -
Joomla: content accesible through all kinds of other links >> duplicate content?!
When i did a site: search on Google i've noticed all kind of URL's on my site were indexed, while i didn't add them to the Joomla navigation (or they were not linked anywhere on the site). Some examples: www.domain.com/1-articlename >> that way ALL articles are publicly visible, even if they are not linked to a menu-item... If by accident such a link get's shared it will be indexed in google, you can have 2 links with same content... www.domain.com/2-uncategorised >> same with categories, automatically these overview pages are visible to people who know this URL. On it you see all the articles that belong to that category. www.domain.com/component/content >> this gives an overview of all the categories inside your Joomla CMS I think most will agree this is not good for your site's SEO? But how can this be solved? Is this some kind of setting within Joomla? Anyone who dealt with these problems already?
Technical SEO | | conversal0 -
Syndicated content outranks my original article
I have a small site and write original blog content for my small audience. There is a much larger, highly relevant site that is willing to accept guest blogs and they don't require original content. It is one of the largest sites within my niche and many potential customers of mine are there. When I create a new article I first post to my blog, and then share it with G+, twitter, FB, linkedin. I wait a day. By this time G has seen the links that point to my article and has indexed it. Then I post a copy of the article on the much larger site. I have a rel=author tag within the article but the larger site adds "nofollow" to that tag. I have tried putting a link rel=canonical tag in the article but the larger site strips that tag out. So G sees a copy of my content on this larger site. I'm hoping they realize it was posted a day later than the original version on my blog. But if not will my blog get labeled as a scraper? Second: when I Google the exact blog title I see my article on the larger site shows up as the #1 search result but (1) there is no rich snippet with my author creds (maybe because the author tag was marked nofollow?), and (2) the original version of the article from my blog is not in the results (I'm guessing it was stripped out as duplicate). There are benefits for my article being on the larger site, since many of my potential customers are there and the article does include a link back to my site (the link is nofollow). But I'm wondering if (1) I can fix things so my original article shows up in the search results, or (2) am I hurting myself with this strategy (having G possibly label me a scraper)? I do rank for other phrases in G, so I know my site hasn't had a wholesale penalty of some kind.
Technical SEO | | scanlin0 -
Canonical Tag - Magento - Help
Hello, I was hoping to get some help or tips on how to best control the canonical tag on a Magento based website. When you go into the Magento admin and enable the option to use the canonical tag on pages, all that does is input the canonical tag to the exact page just with the http:// in the url. My goal is to use the canonical tag on specific pages and point it to other pages, not just the same page with an http:// For example, right now for page: example.com/question/baseball the canonical tag is pointing to http://example.com/question/baseball What i want is to be able to do is take: example.com/question/baseball and have the canonical tag point to example.com/question/baseballbats Is this possible? Does what I'm saying make sense? Please let me know what you all think.... Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Prime850 -
Content on top-level-domain vs. content on subpage
Hello Seomoz community, I just built a new website, mainly for a single affiliate programm and it ranks really well at google. Unfortunately the merchant doesn’t like the name of my domain, that’s why I was thrown out of the affiliate program. So suppose the merchant is a computer monitor manufacturer and his name is “Digit”. The name of my domain is something like monitorsdigital.com at the moment. (It’s just an example, I don’t own this URL). The structure of my website is: 1 homepage with much content on it + a blog. The last 5 blog entries are displayed on the homepage. Because I got kicked out of the affiliate program I want to permanent redirect monitorsdigital.com to another domain. But what should the new website look like? I have two possibilities: Copy the whole monitorsdigital website to a new domain, called something like supermonitors.com. Integrate the monitorsdigital website into my existing website about different monitor manufacturers. E.g.: allmonitors.com/digit-monitors.html (that url is permitted by the merchant) What do you think is the better way? I just got the impression, that it seems to be a little easier to rank high with a top-level-domain (www.supermonitors.com) than with a subpage (www.allmonitors.com/digit-monitors.html). However the subpage can benefit from the domain authority, that was generated by other subpages. Thanks for your help and best regards MGMT
Technical SEO | | MGMT0 -
Duplicate Title Tags and Meta Desc even with the correct Canonical Tag
I show a large/growing number of duplicate title tags and duplicate meta descriptions in my webmaster tools. I look at both pages Link 1 - http://www.thatsmytopper.com/wedding-cake-toppers/theme-cake-toppers/beach-theme-cake-toppers/where/color/petal-pink.html Link 2 - http://www.thatsmytopper.com/wedding-cake-toppers/theme-cake-toppers/beach-theme-cake-toppers/where/color/petal-pink/limit/16.html Both pages have the following canonical url: <link rel="<a class="attribute-value">canonical</a>" href="http://www.thatsmytopper.com/wedding-cake-toppers/theme-cake-toppers/beach-theme-cake-toppers.html" > Why does this show up as a duplicate title tag and description to Google still?
Technical SEO | | bhalverson0 -
Canonical Issues with Wordpress
Hi all, I have just started using Wordpress SEO by Yoast and still having a hard time correcting my Canonical issues for all posts with a .html at the end. The pluggin allows you to add a '/' to the end for canonical issues, but just for pages, not posts. How best in Wordpress to make my post change from .html/ to .html. I really don't want to go to the hassle to make each URL a new 301 redirect in my .htaccess. I hate the .html, but if they are going to stay, how can I make sure I get the .html/ link juice back to them. Many thanks!
Technical SEO | | RunningInTheRain0