Canonical Tag on All Pages
-
This is a new one for me. I have a client that has a canonical tag on almost every page of their site. Even on pages that don't need it.
For example on http://www.client.com/examplex
they had code:
Maybe I have missed something, but is there a reason for this? Does this hurt the ranking of the page?
-
It looks like it was a typo on my end. Thanks ... great catch.
-
I noticed you have:
For example on http://www.client.com/examplex
they had code:
The URL in the canonical code has a trailing slash at the end. Is that a mistype, or Is the site using canonicals as a way of addressing duplicate content by pointing the trailing slash version to the non trailing slash version?
If the CMS automatically creates two versions of each page with and without the slash, that might be one reason to have canonicals on every page.
-
There isn't a major negative effect when using canonicals even when they are not needed. Some CMS use sitewide canonicals to easier tackle duplicate URLs. So if a base URL is using parameters, the CMS might have been setup to follow back to the canonical URL.
A quick example would be: view-source:http://www.expedia.com/
-
Oh ok, I see what you mean. What it is actually saying is "this page you are looking at is the one true source". It basically makes a correlation with the search engines between the content on the page and what page that content should be on, in a lesser sense if it is found on another page.
-
Even when it references the page that it is on? That is where I am a little baffled. It is like saying this page you are looking at is the same as the page you are looking at... right? (page x is referencing page x)
Again, might be out of the loop here, so want to verify.
-
Why would you think a page would not need one? It is hard to tell from the example you gave what you meant, but I take the stance that every page needs one.
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
-
Meta robots at every page rather than using robots.txt for blocking crawlers? How they'll get indexed if we block crawlers?
Hi all, The suggestion to use meta robots tag rather than robots.txt file is to make sure the pages do not get indexed if their hyperlinks are available anywhere on the internet. I don't understand how the pages will be indexed if the entire site is blocked? Even though there are page links are available, will Google really index those pages? One of our site got blocked from robots file but internal links are available on internet for years which are not been indexed. So technically robots.txt file is quite enough right? Please clarify and guide me if I'm wrong. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Dealing with Omitted Page
For my most competitive term, the wrong page ranks (and not well either). The landing page I built for it has never shown up for that term except after I include the omitted results. The page that does rank is category page page above it. All that's fine, because neither page was all that great...BUT, I have completely re-written the content for the landing page, got local area pictures, local testimonials and a video. So here's my question: Should I put all that content on the landing page that's been omitted or tweak the page that ranks and put it there? To me it makes the most sense to put the content on the page that has been omitted, but I don't know how google treats pages that have been omitted in the past. Is it going to have some sort of bias against the page, because it was omitted so many times earlier for that keyword? Or, will it be treated just like any other page, and if the content is good enough, then it will rank just fine. If anyone's dealt with this, then I'd love to hear all about it! Thanks, Ruben
Algorithm Updates | | KempRugeLawGroup0 -
Canonicalization on more than one page?
is it proper to "canocalize" more than one page in a site? Or should it only be on the home page? eg: http://www.sundayschoolnetwork.com">
Algorithm Updates | | sakeith0 -
Has anyone seen this before? One domain dominates the entire first page!
Do a google search for "sober college" and tell me you don't see the entire page filled with one domain. (except the last result)
Algorithm Updates | | EmarketedTeam0 -
Our Rankings are being very inconsistent! Some days we are on the front page, some days we are not in the top 50\. This happens on a weekly and sometimes daily basis... Any thoughts on why this is happening? This newbie appreciates any feedback.
We seem to be having major issues with our rankings. When I came into the company, the company was in the middle of cleaning up some of their past SEO efforts that had caused some issues with some of the latest Google updates. We were able to get the site back up to par, and some of our rankings were improved back to the first page, but then they disappeared. They will head back to the first page and then disappear again on a weekly and sometimes daily basis. Does anyone have any idea on why it will be doing this so inconsistently and so often? This newbie appreciates any feedback!!!!!
Algorithm Updates | | PCMV0 -
How Can I Prevent Duplicate Page Title Errors?
I am working on a website that has two different sections, one for consumers and one for business. However, the products and the product pages are essentially the same but, of course, the pricing and quantities may be different. We just have different paths based on the kind of customer. And, we get feeds from manufacturers for the content so it's difficult to change it. We want Google to index both sections of the site but we don't want to get hammered for duplicate page titles and content. Any suggestions? Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | JillCS0 -
Google site links on sub pages
Hi all Had a look for info on this one but couldn't find much. I know these days that if you have a decent domain good will often automatically put site links on for your home if someone searches for your company name, however has anyone seen these links appear for sub pages? For example, lets say I had a .com domain with /en /fr /de sub folders, each seoed for their location. If I were to then have domain.com/en/ as no1 in Google for my company in the UK would I be able to get site links under this or does it only work on the 'proper' homepage domain.com/ A client of mine wants to reorganise their website so they have different location sections ranking in different markets but they also want to keep having sitewide links as they like the look of it Thanks Carl
Algorithm Updates | | Grumpy_Carl0 -
Large site with faceted navigation using rel=canonical, but Google still has issues
First off, I just wanted to mention I did post this on one other forum so I hope that is not completely against the rules here or anything. Just trying to get an idea from some of the pros at both sources. Hope this is received well. Now for the question..... "Googlebot found an extremely high number of URLs on your site:" Gotta love these messages in GWT. Anyway, I wanted to get some other opinions here so if anyone has experienced something similar or has any recommendations I would love to hear them. First off, the site is very large and utilizes faceted navigation to help visitors sift through results. I have implemented rel=canonical for many months now to have each page url that is created based on the faceted nav filters, push back to the main category page. However, I still get these damn messages from Google every month or so saying that they found too many pages on the site. My main concern obviously is wasting crawler time on all these pages that I am trying to do what they ask in these instances and tell them to ignore and find the content on page x. So at this point I am thinking about possibly using robots.txt file to handle these, but wanted to see what others around here thought before I dive into this arduous task. Plus I am a little ticked off that Google is not following a standard they helped bring to the table. Thanks for those who take the time to respond in advance.
Algorithm Updates | | PeteGregory0