Canonical to the page itself?
-
Hello,
I'd like to know what happens when you use canonical to the same page itself, like:
Page "example.com"
rel canonical="example.com"
Does that impact in something? Bad or good?
See ya!
-
We're re-evaluating the canonical notice, as it's confusing to a lot of people. Our intent wasn't necessarily to say that the tag is wrong, but more of a "heads up" (in case there are potential problems). Unfortunately, there's no good way to automatically detect what page a canonical should point to, so we tend to have to use general warnings.
-
According to this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8eQgx-njk4 Matt says there is no penalization of any kind with a canonical tag referencing to the page itself.
However, I have noticed that SEOMoz doesn't like it. It keeps reporting thousands of canonicals in the "Notices" report as if there was something I should do about it.
-
Keep in mind that a lot of my organic SEO client work is helping people deal with massive-scale duplicate content problems (including Panda issues), so I'm probably a bit more hyper-sensitive than your average person
-
For some people, a "landing page" could have URL variants, like tracking parameters for affiliates. So, it's hard to talk about them in a vacuum. If you're talking about a regular main-nav page like "About Us", you'd almost never need a canonical tag.
-
For e-commerce I think is very important, even more for the big ones, that have a lot of filters of princing or color that are in fact other URLs. There we need to input a canonical.
But for landing pages, N1 deep, that seems like a hotsite, when the company just sells one online service, I can't imagine what kind of benefits using "self canonical" in a page like this.
Sorry for making this longer, I should've chosen Discussion up there!
Answer when you can! =] -
I'd say it's a matter of risk. If you're on an e-commerce site, for sample, where the risk of a page having URL-based duplicates is high, a pre-emptive canonical can make sense. In a perfect world, I agree with Alan - it's better not to need them. I've just rarely seen that perfect world on large sites.
"Landing pages" is a loaded term, though, because landing pages can often have tracking parameters (such as affiliate IDs) and other URL modifications. Some landing pages are a perfect storm of dupe content. So, it's really situational.
-
Thanks for the attention Peter.
I understand your point about the Homepage.
But what about other pages? Landing pages with canonical to it self?
It seems to me meaningless, or worse, lowering trust, like Bing seems to do, in the link Alan wrote above.
-
I think it's good for some pages, especially the home-page, because you can naturally have so many variants ("www" vs. non-www, for example). It's a lot easier to pre-emptively canonicalize them than 301-redirect every URL variant that might pop up over time.
While Alan's concerns are technically correct, I've never seen evidence that either Google or Bing actually devalue a page for a self-referencing canonical. For Google, the risks of duplicates are much worse than the risk of an unnecessary canonical tag, IMO. For Bing, I don't really have good data either way. More and more people use canonical proactively, so I suspect Bing doesn't take action.
I don't generally use it site-wide, unless needed, but I almost always recommend a canonical on the home-page, at least for now. Technical SEO is always changing.
-
yes you are correct,
The only good thing about doing it is stopping scrapers, if they dont take them out, but i dont think this is much of a advanatge as I believ if you do get scraped it is likely that they will remove you canonical, if they dont, I believe that SE's will see that they have a site full of duplicate content and give the credit to you anyhow. I think that SE's get this correct most of the time.
And if you are using canonicals for a valid reason, you dont want Bing to ingnore them because you have misused them elsewhere. Even for 2%
-
Thanks Alan,
So, what seems is that "self page canonical" has no clear or even any good points for taking the risk of doing it?
I'm more concerned about Google, once I'm from Brazil, and Google rules 98% of searches...
-
When some one scrapes your site they take the canonical with them, pointing back to the original, so you still get credit. that is if they dont take it out.
But this is a miss use of a canonical, a canonical should not point back to the same page.
Bing for one has said that they will lose trust in your site if you do this, they will start to not trust all your canonicals, those that are there for a good reason.
http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/webmaster/archive/2011/10/06/managing-redirects-301s-302s-and-canonicals.aspxGoogle have said that they can handle it.
But a canonical does not pass all the link juice, so a canonical to itself, does it leak link juice? google says that can handle it, but that does not mean there is not a leak in link juice.
I for one dont do it, bing has made it clear they dont like, and even though google have said they can handle it, it does not mean there is no down side.
-
Thanks Stephen!
Can your talk more about the scrape? It was not too clear for me.
Sorry =]
-
Nothing bad and turns good when people scrape your content (it gets scraped with the canonical to your page) or you make a mistake with your information architecture (as things tend to point to the correct place)
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
-
Canonical home page references - logo link
should a website's logo be linked to the "abc.com/index.html" page or to the "abc.com" domain root? Is one better for the search engine robots?
On-Page Optimization | | mtishman1 -
Login Page Outranking Homepage
Hi all, I have a subscription based website with a members login. For our branded terms, this login page is outranking the homepage and we're unsure what, if anything to do about it. One suggestion was to deindex it, but the counter-argument was that we'd be taking away one of our spots on the first page. I feel from a user experience, it would be best to deindex it to try and get the homepage ranked #1 since the login page not optimised towards new visitors. Another suggestion was to just optimise the title and description to make it look a little nicer. I would love to hear your thoughts Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | CupidTeam0 -
Content for the Home Page
Hi All, I have a Videos website which contains Videos of all types + Family safe type... The home page has sections and Videos listed. Now for SEO purpose i need to have content? this is what i read in most places. What is the kind of content i can place on a Videos website Home page? I can write about a Movie or actor but that content on Home page would that be of any use? We have a About us page etc to know who we are.. Any ideas please..
On-Page Optimization | | Nettv0 -
Redirecting https pages
If I add 301 redirects from the https versions of the root domain to the http:www.website.com (canonical version), will this prevent users from being able to access the https version? I believe the https version is only accessed once users log into the site. Thank you!
On-Page Optimization | | HiddenPeak0 -
Internal Linking - Same page
Is there any benefit in internally linking back to the same page? I have no other relevant pages in the site I can link to so wondering if it's worthwhile to use anchor text to link back to the same page?
On-Page Optimization | | Will_Craig0 -
Canonical
http://www.providenceelectricnc.com/monroe-electrician-nc Shows great in on Page Report Card for Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical No More Than One Canonical URL Tag Then POW Canonical URL Tag Usage .... it says there is none ....?? HUH ? Searched forum but it is not discussed . Thanks !
On-Page Optimization | | SEOJunkie670 -
Why does my on-page report card say my page title is 403 forbidden when its not?
I'm trying to get on top of my on page stuff and I'm going through the SEO Moz on-page report cards and it says I'm scoring a fail on certain elements within the 'critical' and 'high importance' factors as my page title is '403 forbidden' but when I go on to my site, my sites CMS it's not '403 forbidden' it's the text I entered?
On-Page Optimization | | jamesj35mm0 -
Creating New Pages Versus Improving Existing Pages
What are some things to consider or things to evaluate when deciding whether you should focus resources on creating new pages (to cover more related topics) versus improving existing pages (adding more useful information, etc.)?
On-Page Optimization | | SparkplugDigital0