Rel-canonical tag confusion
-
I had our web development company implement the rel-canonical tag on all pages of our website to get rid of the duplicate content months ago. However, when I use the On Page optimizer tool (in previous version) it would tell me I'm not using the rel-canonical tag correctly on the page I was grading and when I untagged use rel-canonical tag in our CMS (which was pointing to the correct page) my grade would go to an A. Now with the new version it says I'm using it wrong either way, when I have the tag used in my CMS and everything else is good I have a B, but one I click to not use Rel-canonical tag I have a C. Both ways it shows up in On-page tool without a check in Apprpriate Use of Rel Canonical.
I've attached pictures. In C version it says - Canonical URL "/info/solutions/" and "/info/solutions/"
In B version: Canonical URL "/info/solutions/"
What am I doing wrong and how do i fix this? Because ALL of my grades have dropped to Bs and Cs.
Thanks!
iklEHOjJLZE4966 [URL]]([URL=http://imgur.com/5BYcV][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/5BYcV.jpg[/IMG][/URL]) 5BYcV
-
The tag should work fine with the partial URL.
If you are still concerned about the warning, try adding the base href tag within the of your page. It would be as follows:
<base href="http://www.aircycle.com/">
This tag explicitly specifies the base URL to which all partial URLs are built upon for a given page. Try adding this tag to just the one page, then running the report again to see if that resolves the issue. If it does, then you know what change the tool is requesting.
To be clear, the canonical tag you are using should be fine for search engines assuming there is no other issue. This may be a specific issue with the tool.
Since testing the base href tag, and the full URL are relatively quick and easy to do, my suggestion is to spend 10 minutes performing these tests to see the results. If the tests work, then you can contact the SEOmoz help desk and report your findings as an issue with the tool. It could be a bug or limitation with the tool.
-
So does the tag still work with the partial URL or no? It worked before, so I'm not sure what the ordeal is now but that the new CMS is causing SEOmoz some difficulty reading this.
I'd have to have my web development company fix it to the full URL.
-
I am going to take my best guess, which would need to be tested.
The tool is seeing a partial URL and it does not like it. The best way to confirm the issue is add the complete URL and then test the page. If it passes, then I am correct.
<link href='http://www.aircycle.com/info/solutions/' rel='canonical' />
-
the missing one just shows the Canonical url listing the rest of the URL twice.
B version: "/info/solutions/"
c version: "/Info/solutions/" and "/info/solutions/"
-
-
The first and third images appear the same to me, and the second image is a broken link.
"/info/solutions/" is not a complete URL. It can't be indexed.
Can you possibly share the URL to an example of a web page with this issue?
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
-
Missing Description Tag
I pulled the latest moz report and my category pages are being flagged as missing description tag, but not only is the description visible on each page, it is also in the code for all to see. Here is the code, what am I missing? | |
Moz Pro | | moon-boots
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | dir="ltr" class="ltr" lang="en"> | | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | <title>Astronaut Costumes</title> |
| | <base href="<a href=" http:="" www.interstellarstore.com="" "="">http://www.interstellarstore.com/" /> |
| | |
| | |
| | http://www.interstellarstore.com/image/catalog/Earth.png" rel="icon" /> |
| | catalog/view/theme/pav_WindOnline_Store/stylesheet/bootstrap.css" rel="stylesheet" /> |
| | catalog/view/theme/pav_WindOnline_Store/stylesheet/stylesheet.css" rel="stylesheet" /> |
| | catalog/view/theme/pav_WindOnline_Store/stylesheet/customize/1455569423.css" rel="stylesheet" /> |
| | catalog/view/javascript/font-awesome/css/font-awesome.min.css" rel="stylesheet" /> |
| | catalog/view/theme/pav_WindOnline_Store/stylesheet/animate.css" rel="stylesheet" /> |
| | catalog/view/javascript/jquery/magnific/magnific-popup.css" rel="stylesheet" /> |
| | catalog/view/javascript/jquery/owl-carousel/owl.carousel.css" rel="stylesheet" /> |
| | catalog/view/theme/pav_WindOnline_Store/stylesheet/fonts.css" rel="stylesheet" /> |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |0 -
Why does it keep displaying br tags and claiming 404 errors on like 4 of my URL's for all my Wordpress sites?
Is anyone else having the same issue? These errors don't actually exist and i think it has something to do with wordpress - how can i fix this?
Moz Pro | | MillerPR0 -
Very confused on site.com/ or not using a /
I'm wanting to put the rel="canonical" tag on my homepage but I'm not sure which to use? How would you know what to use and always links to, http://www.site.com or http://www.site.com**/** Personally I never knew there was a difference until I used the seomoz tool and I wasn't using the tag.
Moz Pro | | GYMSN0 -
Crawl Diagnostics shows two title and meta tag errors but they are false positives.
I got one hit each on "Missing Meta Description Tag" and "Title Missing or Empty" but in the source of my page they are clearly there: <title>Protein Powder | Compare and Get the Best Prices</title> <meta name="keywords" content="protein powder, whey protein, protein supplement, whey protein isolate, hydrolyzed whey" /> I understand there are conventions which may or may not be followed by Drupal (I read an earlier question where ordering and W3C conventions were suggested) but i'm not sure how to fix them given Drupal will just overwrite any hand editing the next time something is built and importantly, I can't get the crawl to work on cue - it works on the automatic once a week crawl in the main campaign summary but every time I've specifically used the Crawl Test tool it gives me a "There was an error submitting your request to the crawler. Please try again later" so I can't really test any changes. Given Google seems to be recognising the title tag - ie showing it in the results - Do I put this down as seomoz just not working? Kind Regards, Brian
Moz Pro | | btrr690 -
Crawl Errors Confusing Me
The SEOMoz crawl tool is telling me that I have a slew of crawl errors on the blog of one domain. All are related to the MSNbot. And related to trackbacks (which we do want to block, right?) and attachments (makes sense to block those, too) ... any idea why these are crawl issues with MSNbot and not Google? My robots.txt is here: http://www.wevegotthekeys.com/robots.txt. Thanks, MJ
Moz Pro | | mjtaylor0 -
Canonical issue in open site explorer
When I look at my back links in OSE, I see two landing pages on my site that are really the same page. www.mysite.com/ and www.mysite.com/(affiliate code here) These show different inbound link characteristics and page authority. The page in question has a rel=canonical tag. Am I doing something wrong?
Moz Pro | | EugeneF0 -
Blogger Duplicate Content? and Canonical Tag
Hello: I previously asked this question, but I would love to get more perspectives on this issue. In Blogger, there is an archive page and label(s) page(s) created for each main post. Firstly, does Google, esp. considering Blogger is their product, possibly see the archive and tag pages created in addition to the main post as partial duplicate content? The other dilemma is that each of these instances - main post, archive, label(s) - claim to be the canonical. Does anyone have any insight or experience with this issue and Blogger and how Google is treating the partial duplicates and the canonical claims to the same content (even though the archives and label pages are partial?) I do not see anything in Blogger settings that allows altering these settings - in fact, the only choices in Blogger settings are 'Email Posting' and 'Permissions' (could it be that I cannot see the other setting options because I am a guest and not the blog owner?) Thanks so much everyone! PS - I was not able to add the blog as a campaign in SEOmoz Pro, which in and of itself is odd - and which I've never seen before - could this be part of the issue? Are Blogger free blogs not able to be crawled for some reason via SEOmoz Pro?
Moz Pro | | holdtheonion0 -
Confused by Google Mobile App (on Blackberry) results??!
First off, Hi guys I'm a new user here, in fact only in my second week of my trial period. However, I can assure you that I'll be continuing my subscription as this website is 'one hell of a bit of kit!'. Now, to my predicament. I have a website: http://www.limegreenofficeproducts.co.uk which I am trying to move on up the rankings in Google (just like everyone else...). Well, I have followed the instructions and guidance through the Campaign Manager and I have 'A' ratings now for a couple of my preferred keywords, namely 'Office Supplies' & 'Office Products'. I also have a number of textlinks with these exact terms, some quite powerful (I'm the only outbound link on a Homepage PR5 on one). Anyway, being a complete and utter control freak - I wake up in the morning and check my rankings using the Google Mobile App for Blackberry whilst throwing as much coffee as possible down my neck. Basically (if you're not familiar with this app, it is just the same as connecting to the mobile internet and carrying out a search - or at least it should be). Well I was really excited to find that I was ranking at No.41 for 'Office Supplies' and No.17 for 'Office Products'. When I fully woke up and ventured to the office, I checked on the Mac through the normal Google UK and I'm nowhere, for either? What makes it even more confusing is that the results on the mobile seem to be intermittent - so if I check at 11.00am I'm No.17, 11.05 I'm nowhere, 11.10 back to No.17 - but only on the Mobile App. I have the Mobile App set up to Google UK, so that can't be the problem. I'm just wondering if either the Mobile App is ahead of the 'Real' Google UK results, or behind.The main reason for asking, is so that I can establish whether what I am doing is having a positive, or negative effect on the rankings. And if this is an quicker way to find out - then great! I assume the advice to come back will be '..ignore the mobile app..' but as it's being kinder to me than the 'Real' Google I'd like to be a bit kinder to it, and give the little fella the benefit of the doubt. But having said that I just checked the search results (Top 1000) for Keywords 'Office Supplies' & 'Office Products' - For Office Products the site was No.614 and for 'Office Supplies it wasn't in the top 1000, ouch. I know these things take time, as I have worked on a couple of other sites of ours and it seems that as soon as you are about to throw the towel in, the results just kick in. I'm not expecting miracles overnight, far from it - but it has me really confused. Does anyone have any suggestions/advice?(except '...get a life coffee fiend') Regards Limegreen
Moz Pro | | Limegreen0