Should I canonicalize URLs with no query params even though query params are always automatically appended?
-
There's a section of my client's website that presents quarterly government financial data. Users can filter results to see different years and quarters of financial info.
If a user navigates to those pages, the URLs automatically append the latest query parameters. It's not a redirect...when I asked a developer what the mechanism was for this happening, he said "magic." He honestly didn't know how to describe it.
So my question is, is it ok to canonicalize the URL without any query parameters, knowing that the user will always be served a page that does have query parameters? I need to figure out how to manage all of the various versions of these URLs.
-
This is VERY helpful, thank you so much.
-
I would recommend to canonicalize these to a version of the page without query strings, IF you are not trying to optimize different version of the page for different keyword searches, and/or if the content doesn't change in a way which is significant for purpose of SERP targeting. From what you described, I think those are the case, and so I would canonicalize to a version without the query strings.
An example where you would NOT want to do that would be on an ecommerce site where you have a URL like www.example.com/product-detail.jsp?pid=1234. Here, the query string is highly relevant and each variation should be indexed uniquely for different keywords, assuming the values of "pid" each represent unique products. Another example would be a site of state-by-state info pages like www.example.com/locations?state=WA. Once again, this is an example where the query strings are relevant, and should be part of the canonical.
But, in any case a canonical should still be used, to remove extraneous query strings, even in the cases above. For example, in addition to the "pid" or "state" query strings, you might also find links which add tracking data like "utm_source", etc. And you want to make sure to canonicalize just to the level of the page which you want in the search engine's index.
You wrote that the query strings and page content vary based on years and quarters. If we assume that you aren't trying to target search terms with the year and quarter in them, then I would canonicalize to the URL without those strings (or to a default set). But if you are trying to target searches for different years and quarters in the user's search phrase, then not only would you include those in the canonical URL, but you would also need to vary enough page content (meta data, title, and on-page content) to avoid being flagged as duplicates.
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
-
URL ASCII Characters Issue
Hi guys; Is there any different between URL whit capital ASCII code and URL with small ASCII Code? For example I have 2 URLS for one page like this: 1- 332-%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%B5%DB%8C%D9%84-%D8%AF%D8%B1-%DA%A9%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%AF%D8%A7.html 2- 332-%d8%aa%d8%ad%d8%b5%db%8c%d9%84-%d8%af%d8%b1-%da%a9%d8%a7%d9%86%d8%a7%d8%af%d8%a7.html both of them point to same page but no 1 is non SSL and no 2 is ssl version! and whole pges of site forces to https
Technical SEO | | seoiransite0 -
Will using query string in the URL and swapping H1s for filtered view of the blog impact SEO negatively?
This is a blog revamp we are trying to personalize the experience for 2 separate audiences.We are revamping our blog the user starts on the blog that shows all stories (first screen) then can filter to a more specific blog (ESG or News blog). The filtered version for ESG or the News blog is done through a query string in the URL. We also swap out the page’s H1s accordingly in this process, will this impact SEO negatively?
Technical SEO | | lina_digital0 -
Usage of keywords in URL
Hi everyone, I'm trying to optimize our website and I'm not sure what's ideal for our URL structure. We have two products: one of them is focused on B2C & the other one on B2B.
Technical SEO | | Klouwers
Our homepage is focused on the B2C product. For our B2B product, I'm not sure what's ideal. The URL for our 'homepage' of the B2B product is ourdomain.com/software. We have different target groups for our B2B software, and therefore different pages on our website. Which URL would be best to use for the keyword personal trainer software?
1. ourdomain.com/software/personal-trainer-software
2. ourdomain.com/software/personal-trainer0 -
Shortening URL's
Hello again Mozzers, I am debating what could be a fairly drastic change to the company website and I would appreciate your thoughts. The URL structure is currently as follows Product Pages
Technical SEO | | ATP
www.url.co.uk/product.html Category Pages
www.url.co.uk/products/category/subcategory.html I am debating removing the /products/ section as i feel it doesn't really add much and lengthens the url with a pointless word. This does mean however redirecting about 50-60 pages on the website, is this worth it? Would it do more damage than good? Am i just being a bit OCD and it wont really have an impact? As always, thanks for the input0 -
%20 URL accessible, does this matter?
I have a rewrite on the CMS I work on. What happens here is that if someone creates a page on the website and uses spaces as the name then the CMS automatically replaces the spaces with -'s. I noticed this morning that the %20 URLs are accessible but not indexed at all. Only the - URLs are indexed. could this cause duplicate content or penalties? I know best practice is to have only ONE URL for a page but somehow the developer can't redirect the %20 URLs to the - URLs. Opinions?
Technical SEO | | DROIDSTERS0 -
No Keyword in URL
SEOMoz (and other platforms) advise that I need to add my keyword to the page URL, however as far as I'm concerned it has been, so why don't these platforms see it. My home page URL is www.salesandinternetmarketing.com, but apparently I haven't added the keyword internet marketing to the URL, what advice can you give me please? Lindsay
Technical SEO | | lindsayjhopkins1 -
Spider Indexed Disallowed URLs
Hi there, In order to reduce the huge amount of duplicate content and titles for a cliënt, we have disallowed all spiders for some areas of the site in August via the robots.txt-file. This was followed by a huge decrease in errors in our SEOmoz crawl report, which, of course, made us satisfied. In the meanwhile, we haven't changed anything in the back-end, robots.txt-file, FTP, website or anything. But our crawl report came in this November and all of a sudden all the errors where back. We've checked the errors and noticed URLs that are definitly disallowed. The disallowment of these URLs is also verified by our Google Webmaster Tools, other robots.txt-checkers and when we search for a disallowed URL in Google, it says that it's blocked for spiders. Where did these errors came from? Was it the SEOmoz spider that broke our disallowment or something? You can see the drop and the increase in errors in the attached image. Thanks in advance. [](<a href=)" target="_blank">a> [](<a href=)" target="_blank">a> LAAFj.jpg
Technical SEO | | ooseoo0 -
Which is The Best Way to Handle Query Parameters?
Hi mozzers, I would like to know the best way to handle query parameters. Say my site is example.com. Here are two scenarios. Scenario #1: Duplicate content example.com/category?page=1
Technical SEO | | jombay
example.com/category?order=updated_at+DESC
example.com/category
example.com/category?page=1&sr=blog-header All have the same content. Scenario #2: Pagination example.com/category?page=1
example.com/category?page=2 and so on. What is the best way to solve both? Do I need to use Rel=next and Rel=prev or is it better to use Google Webmaster tools parameter handling? Right now I am concerned about Google traffic only. For solving the duplicate content issue, do we need to use canonical tags on each such URL's? I am not using WordPress. My site is built on Ruby on Rails platform. Thanks!0