Are To Many Rel Canonical Links A Bad Thing?
-
Are To Many Rel Canonical Links A Bad Thing?
I had "twin" domains so I redirected my .com to www..com and now I have a lot of Rel Canonical Links.
-
Thank you!
-
Hi!
In your case you should do a redirect (301) of all non-www to the www-version of your site. You don't need canonicals for this. It is better to skip the non-www entirely (or other way around). Just decide what version to go with. Old link-juice will follow the redirect to the new page.
Use canonicals if you have a bunch of simular pages you would like to to merge into one. Like if you have two pages with basically the same content.
Check your site and what headers it puts out with this tool: http://www.webconfs.com/http-header-check.php Response of non-www should be 301, very important!
Btw, a lot of canonicals are not bad if they are used wisely
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
-
ASP Canonical and Internal Linking
Hello - I'm working with a large ASP website and trying to troubleshoot issues I believe might be related to how the canonical element is used. On page - all internal links, including navigation links, use the following format (uppercase) - website.com**/F**older/Folder/Product . So, any page navigated to will always display the uppercase version of the URL. And, all of these pages have the canonical tag pointing to the lowercase version of the URL. The pages included in Google's index are all lowercase versions of the URL like this - website.com**/f**older/folder/product . My concern is that a lot of internal authority flow is being impacted/negated because all internal links point to the uppercase versions of URLs and all those pages reference the lowercase version URL in the canonical reference. Is this a valid concern?
On-Page Optimization | | LA_Steve0 -
Wordpress #comment links?
We just started our trial account and have the results from our first Moz Pro Site Crawl. It's showing that we have a large portion of our pages have 'Too Many Links' and I'm trying to determine exactly what this means and how to fix it. The article referenced is from 2011 and doesn't fully address what I'm looking for. Here are a few questions: 1. Can we lower the 'link count' by adding a 'no follow' or does too many links, count links regardless? The question being, is the only way to solve this by removing links or are their no follow or no index options that will prevent us from having this issue moving forward? 2. Comment Links: Our site is in Wordpress and I just recognized that each of the comment links are followed: https://screencast.com/t/b0CIKVafWw. These aren't links from our users, rather these are links within Wordpress and are structured like this: https://mysite.com/blog-post/#comment-6970. From my screenshot you can see they are highlighted as 'followed links'. Is there a setting within Wordpress to turn this off or is there another option I should consider? Should we just make these no index, no follow links? Will that solve the 'Too many links' problem? I searched through the Q&A's and couldn't find an answer directly to my question. Most were around people leaving links in the comments section, which isn't what I'm looking for. Thank you for any help you can provide.
On-Page Optimization | | FabulesslyFrugal0 -
301 to canonical
I'm doing some work on a website, they have a very popular product search where you enter a specific part code (6 digits) and it takes you to the product. So for example Search: 123456 Page redirected to domain.com/product/123456 With a canonical of domain.com/product/this-is-the-product-title Would it be beneficial to redirect from /product/123456 to /product/this-is-the-product-title Google seems to be indexing both versions. For some of these products a reasonable amount of links are built.
On-Page Optimization | | ThomasHarvey0 -
Can Javascript Links Be Used to Reduce Links per Page?
We are trying to reduce the number of links per page, so for the low-value footer links we are considering coding them as javascript links. We realize Google can read java, but the goal is to reduce level of importance assigned to those internal links. Would this be a valid approach? So the question is would converting low-value footer links to js like below help reduce the number of links per page in google's eyes even though we're reasonably sure they can read javascript. <a <span="" class="html-tag">href</a><a <span="" class="html-tag">="</a><a class="html-attribute-value html-external-link" target="_blank">javascript:void(0);</a>" data-footer-link="/about/about">About Us
On-Page Optimization | | Jay-T0 -
Why so many crawl errors?
Our site is showing it has a ton of crawl errors in the back end, mostly concerning duplicate content within our blog. The content is unique however. We know this for certain because it's done in house or put together by some of the freelance writers we work with. The site is for an RV dealership and we're using a template-based system from a well known company. Any ideas on what may be causing this?
On-Page Optimization | | BlakeArbogast0 -
Which pages should use rel="canonical" links?
I have many pages showing up as multiple content. Most of the them belong to product pages for my store, login pages that show up everywhere on the site, etc. I know that I need to use the rel=canonical link in the header but after searching the forum I'm still unsure of what pages need it. Is it the pages that I don't want searched/crawled by Google or the other way around? Thanks! Crystal
On-Page Optimization | | COfashionista0 -
My report also notes that I have 176 Rel Canonical. What does this mean and how do I fix it. Thanks
My report also notes that I have 176 Rel Canonical. What does this mean and how do I fix it. Thanks http://pro.seomoz.org/campaigns/95663/issues/18
On-Page Optimization | | cyaindc0 -
Too many On-Page Links on a WP based Website
Hi, I've already browsed through various of the Q&As on the "too many On-Page links" issue, but I would really need some advice concerning a WP Site with a dropdown navigation. As outlined in the on-page report, every site has about 180 outgoing links, which pretty much is the number of site featured in the navigation. Even though the 100 link limit is somewhat outdated I'm still worried about the distribution of linkjuice from the starting page and how Google perceives the importance of the various pages. Would it make sense to adapt the structure of the navigation, so that the starting page only links to the 5 category pages and the category pages only link to the detail pages they contain? The site has good rankings for several pages and I assume that Google can tell that the large number of links is caused by the navigation. But with every page having appr. 180 links it may be difficult for Google to tell, which of those pages are the most important regarding internal link structure... Looking foward to your opinion and insights! Cheers, Chris
On-Page Optimization | | adwordize0