Multilingual -> ahref lang, canonical and duplicated title content
-
Hi all!
We have our site eurasmus.com where we are implementing the multilingual.
We have already available english and spanish and we use basically href lang to control different areas.First question:
When a page is not translated but still is visible in both langauges under /en and /es is it enough with the hreflang or should we
add a canonical as well? Nowadays we are apply href lang and only canonicals to the one which are duplicated
in the same language.Second question:
When some pages are not translated, like http://eurasmus.com/en/info/find-intern-placement-austria and http://eurasmus.com/es/info/find-intern-placement-austria,
we are setting up the href lang but still moz detects title and meta duplicated (not duplicate page content).
What do you suggest we should do?Let me know and thank you before hand for your help!
-
What I know is that since almost one year Google is able to deal with duplicated content in a multilingual or multicountry environment if the hreflang is well implemented.
Moreover... if you were using the rel="canonical", you were practically quitting to your Spanish home page (in this specific case) any possibility to even being present in the index, because you would be telling Google:
"Don't consider this URL, but just the canonical one".
This is one of the reasons why Google quit all mention of the rel="canonical" in the hreflang help pages.
-
I am not so sure about using canonical, even if this case is multilingual and not multicountry.
Maybe this is due to the well-known inability Google has to communicate correctly, but in this case it is quite clear with its example:
Some example scenarios where rel="alternate" hreflang="x" is recommended:
You keep the main content in a single language and translate only the template, such as the navigation and footer. Pages that feature user-generated content like a forums typically do this.
This scenario is the one described in this Q&A, so I personally would not suggest canonicalization but yes using hreflang, and - obviously - my main priority would be telling to localize all the content of the page, also because without a complete translation the opportunities to rank in Google.es are substantially zero.
-
I confirm that the moz crawler does not detect or consider the hreflang (in fact no tabs or advice in the moz analytics is dedicated to it).
The only tools that consider it by default (and that I know) are deepcrawl and onpage.org
-
They are not great at writing their own explanations for international. What they meant above is if you have geo-targeted correctly, you would not have to use a canonical between two pages that are the same. That they will figure it out on their own.
You aren't geo-targeting, so I still think the canonical would be needed.
-
Hi there Kate!
Thanks for your time. That is what logic tells me.
But "God" google says, confusing me:
Specifying language and location
We've expanded our support of the rel="alternate" hreflang link element to handle content that is translated or provided for multiple geographic regions. The hreflang attribute can specify the language, optionally the country, and URLs of equivalent content. By specifying these alternate URLs, our goal is to be able to consolidate signals for these pages, and to serve the appropriate URL to users in search. Alternative URLs can be on the same site or on another domain.
Annotating pages as substantially similar content
Optionally, for pages that have substantially the same content in the same language and are targeted at multiple countries, you may use the rel="canonical" link element to specify your preferred version. We’ll use that signal to focus on that version in search, while showing the local URLs to users where appropriate. For example, you could use this if you have the same product page in German, but want to target it separately to users searching on the Google properties for Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.
Update: to simplify implementation, we no longer recommend using rel=canonical.So I guess canonical is no longer needed?
-
HREFLANG is all you need to note the change in language between two pages. However, if the page has not been translated and is available under both language subfolders, make sure there isn't an HREFLANG and has a canonical. When the pages are identical and have 2 URLs, us a canonical and NOT HREFLANG.
I am not sure if Moz detects HREFLANG. If you know it's set up correctly, just ignore the warnings in Moz. And if you can, translate the title and description as well. That'll help get rid of the warnings.
-
Geo-tagging is not necessary if the content is just translated.
-
Did you assign the geography in webmastertools? This is advised and should already prevent some of the problems might they arise ( i think it should be OK)
Using a canonical is always a good way of harnessing the link value to one specific version.
You could test if a problem is there by running your englisch keywords against the local version of Google.
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
-
Shopify Duplicate Content in products
Hello Moz Community, New to Moz and looking forward to beginning my journey towards SEO education and improving our clients' sites. Our client's website is a Shopify store. https://spiritsofthewestcoast.com/ Our first Moz reports show 686 duplicate content issues. I will show the first 4 as examples. https://spiritsofthewestcoast.com/collections/native-earrings-and-studs-in-silver-and-gold/products/haida-eagle-teardrop-earrings https://spiritsofthewestcoast.com/collections/native-earrings-and-studs-in-silver-and-gold/products/haida-orca-silver-earrings https://spiritsofthewestcoast.com/collections/native-earrings-and-studs-in-silver-and-gold/products/silver-oval-earrings https://spiritsofthewestcoast.com/collections/native-earrings-and-studs-in-silver-and-gold/products/haida-eagle-spirit-silver-earrings As you can see, URL titles are unique. But I know that the content in each of those products have very similar product descriptions but not exactly. But since they have been flagged as a site issue by Moz, I am guessing that the content is 95% duplicate. So can a rel=canonical be the right solution for this type of duplicate content? Or should I be considering adding new content to each of 686 products to drop below the 95% threshold? Or another solution that I may not be aware of. Thanks in advance for your assistance and expertise! Sean
Technical SEO | | TheUpdateCompany1 -
Looking for a technical solution for duplicate content
Hello, Are there any technical solutions to duplicate content similar to the nofollow tag? A tag which can indicate to Google that we know that this is duplicate content but we want it there because it makes sense to the user. Thank you.
Technical SEO | | FusionMediaLimited0 -
Duplicate titles- what quailfies??
What qulifies as a duplicate title? If I have one tile Kelowna Real estate Smith McLellan Group and another title Kelowna Condos Smith Mclellan Group Is that a dupilcate title??
Technical SEO | | Realtor1010 -
Techniques for diagnosing duplicate content
Buonjourno from Wetherby UK 🙂 Diagnosing duplicate content is a classic SEO skill but I'm curious to know what techniques other people use. Personally i use webmaster tools as illustrated here: http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc53/zymurgy_bucket/webmaster-tools-duplicate.jpg but what other techniques are effective? Thanks,
Technical SEO | | Nightwing
David0 -
How to avoid duplicate content penalty when our content is posted on other sites too ?
For recruitment company sites, their job ads are posted muliple times on thier own sites and even on other sites too. These are the same ads (job description is same) posted on diff. sites. How do we avoid duplicate content penalty in this case?
Technical SEO | | Personnel_Concept0 -
Noindex duplicate content penalty?
We know that google now gives a penalty to a whole duplicate if it finds content it doesn't like or is duplicate content, but has anyone experienced a penalty from having duplicate content on their site which they have added noindex to? Would google still apply the penalty to the overall quality of the site even though they have been told to basically ignore the duplicate bit. Reason for asking is that I am looking to add a forum to one of my websites and no one likes a new forum. I have a script which can populate it with thousands of questions and answers pulled direct from Yahoo Answers. Obviously the forum wil be 100% duplicate content but I do not want it to rank for anyway anyway so if I noindex the forum pages hopefully it will not damage the rest of the site. In time, as the forum grows, all the duplicate posts will be deleted but it's hard to get people to use an empty forum so need to 'trick' them into thinking the section is very busy.
Technical SEO | | Grumpy_Carl0 -
Duplicate Content Caused By Blog Filters
We are getting some duplicate content warnings based on our blog. Canonical URL's can work for some of the pages, but most of the duplicate content is caused by blog posts appearing on more than 1 URL. What is the best way to fix this?
Technical SEO | | Marketpath0 -
Duplicate content across multiple domains
I have come across a situation where we have discovered duplicate content between multiple domains. We have access to each domain and have recently within the past 2 weeks added a 301 redirect to redirect each page dynamically to the proper page on the desired domain. My question relates to the removal of these pages. There are thousands of these duplicate pages. I have gone back and looked at a number of these cached pages in google and have found that the cached pages that are roughly 30 days old or older. Will these pages ever get removed from google's index? Will the 301 redirect even be read by google to be redirected to the proper domain and page? If so when will that happen? Are we better off submitting a full site removal request of the sites that carries the duplicate content at this point? These smaller sites do bring traffic on their own but I'd rather not wait 3 months for the content to be removed since my assumption is that this content is competing with the main site. I suppose another option would be to include no cache meta tag for these pages. Any thoughts or comments would be appreciated.
Technical SEO | | jmsobe0