Href Lang tags in audit
-
Hi
I am getting a couple of issues flag with my href lang tags, but when I manually check the pages I can't see the issues.
Issue 1. No self referencing href lang tag example URL - http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/300kg-capacity-manutan-mobile-lift-table-lift-height-860mm-125h204
(these are SKU pages with duplicate content, so we have canonicals pointing to the main product page)
Issue 2. Conflicting hreflang and rel=canonical - http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/500kg-capacity-manutan-mobile-lift-table-lift-height-945mm-127h204
I have checked the source code of the pages with errors against the pages which don't have errors and they look the same - so I am unsure what's wrong?
-
Great thank you. I'm just unsure as to why they're flagging as errors anyway
Thank you!
-
There isn't an error in the markup for the two pages that you shared. Hreflang markup on duplicate pages is useless so you will not lose anything by getting rid of hreflang on these pages. You can try deleting hreflang and see what happens. You only need hreflang on canonical versions of the page. (in your case it would be pages like http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/mobile-lift-tables and http://www.keyonline.ie/en/kie/mobile-lift-tables and not http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/300kg-capacity-manutan-mobile-lift-table-lift-height-860mm-125h204)
Or you can leave it as is and ignore the errors because duplicate pages should have no effect either way.
-
Great thank you, Ill check the bing tracking too!
-
This response from John Doherty might help you out... https://mza.seotoolninja.com/community/q/correct-hreflang-canonical-implementation-for-multilingual-site
One other thing of note was your bing webmaster tools configuration looked broken.
name="msvalidate.01" content="???MI386_BING_ID???"/>
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
-
Audit my SEO Project
Hey professionals, I works on "MyInfo Community" as a SEO worker, anyone can help me to audit my this project? Because i am newbie in this field. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | smartpoedgr0 -
Is single H1 tag still best practice?
Hi Guys, Is having a single h1 tag still best practice for SEO? Guessing multiple h1 tags dilute the value of the tag and keywords within the tag. Thoughts? Cheers.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kayl870 -
International Targeting | Language > 'fa-ir' - no return tags
I see this error in search console :International Targeting | Language > 'fa-ir' - no return tagsURLs for your site and alternate URLs in 'fa-ir' that do not have return tags.and it is really increasingi do not know what is the problem and what I have done wrong? Originating URL Crawl date Alternate URL 1 /abadan/%D8%A2%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%86/browse/vehicles/?place=8,541&v01=0,1&saveLoc=1 11/16/16 http://divar.ir/
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | divar0 -
Fast/Easy Way to Implement Canonical tags in Bulk in Magento CMS?
Hello Amazing SEO Community! Quick Q for a client with a TON of duplicate content. (yikes!) My client is currently undertaking a large SEO project around canonical tagging for their thousands of duplicate pages. Currently, one product sits on multiple URLs and they are being indexed as different pages (with the same content). The issue is found across all products and other pages, and across their international sites as well. One core challenge they face now is lack of time/resources from their developer side. The solution we see to the duplicate content is to manually add a canonical tag to each of our tens of thousands of pages. Their content management system is Magento. Has anyone ever tackled canonicalization for a large site that uses Magento? Any more efficient solutions to manual tagging is ideal. Thanks in advance for your input. -Bonnie
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | accpar0 -
Pagination and matching title tags - does it matter when using rel="prev" and "next" attributes?
I'm looking at a site with the rel="prev" and "next" HTML attributes in place, to deal with pagination. However, the pages in each paginated category have identical page titles - is this an issue? Rand gives an example of how he'd vary page titles here, to prevent problems, though I'm not entirely sure whether this advice applies to sites with the rel="prev" and "next" HTML attributes in place: https://mza.seotoolninja.com/blog/pagination-best-practices-for-seo-user-experience Any advice would be welcome - many thanks, Luke
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Using cononical tag instead of 301
I've got a bit of an odd situation... My business partner and I split up, and he's going to keep the company name. The website that I built for the company has some links to it, and I've managed to build up some DA and PA. I want to get the link juice over to my new website. My former partner doesn't care about the link juice, he just wants a website that he can show people. SO, I can't do a 301 or 302, because that would take down the existing site. Can I just use a canonical tag that refers link power to my new website? Would this be harmful in any way? What should I do to accomplish getting the link power without a redirect, and without contacting each person who has given us a backlink?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Zing-Marketing0 -
Is it a problem that Google's index shows paginated page urls, even with canonical tags in place?
Since Google shows more pages indexed than makes sense, I used Google's API and some other means to get everything Google has in its index for a site I'm working on. The results bring up a couple of oddities. It shows a lot of urls to the same page, but with different tracking code.The url with tracking code always follows a question mark and could look like: http://www.MozExampleURL.com?tracking-example http://www.MozExampleURL.com?another-tracking-examle http://www.MozExampleURL.com?tracking-example-3 etc So, the only thing that distinguishes one url from the next is a tracking url. On these pages, canonical tags are in place as: <link rel="canonical<a class="attribute-value">l</a>" href="http://www.MozExampleURL.com" /> So, why does the index have urls that are only different in terms of tracking urls? I would think it would ignore everything, starting with the question mark. The index also shows paginated pages. I would think it should show the one canonical url and leave it at that. Is this a problem about which something should be done? Best... Darcy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Accidently added a nofollow, noindex tag and then...
Hey guys, My first post here and ironically highlights a ridiculously stupid mistake! Ok, here's the deal... I started building links to one of my new page on a fairly good, old site (DA = >35). Before starting to build links, I added fresh new content, and while doing that, I accidentally added a "nofollow" and "noindex" tag to the page! Guess what, google DID de-index the page ! So the questions is (and YES, I did change the meta tags): Will google re-index the page with some good linking? Will it treat the page as a new, fresh page even though it was present for over a year? I had already started link building to that page, and now technically the links are pointing to a page that does not exist in the index, so once it does get re-indexed, will Google FLAG it as having too many links? Would I be ranking it as a new page? Will its previous ranking (for very few keywords) will come back? Thanks and Regards, Amod
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bonusjonathan0