Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Subscribe to HRA Now!

 



Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?

Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE! 

 



 

 www.CustomReportSharing.com 

From the folks who brought you High Rankings!



Photo
- - - - -

Canonical Url's Not Showing In Webmaster Tools


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 VetoFunk

VetoFunk

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 45 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 17 April 2015 - 04:14 PM

Hey Guys,

 

One of my sites:

[removed]

 

When you look at the source code, it shows the canonical urls. But if you do a fetch in Google Webmaster Tools, it doesn't find the canonical urls. Does that mean it's in the wrong area on the page?

 

Also, I noticed if you go to a page like [removed] but instead go to the non-www version, it redirects to the homepage, not the same www version? Should it be set up that way?

 

Thanks!

 

Jeff


Edited by Jill, 17 April 2015 - 04:16 PM.
removed urls as they're not necessary to answer


#2 chrishirst

chrishirst

    A not so moderate moderator.

  • Moderator
  • 7,718 posts
  • Location:Blackpool UK

Posted 17 April 2015 - 05:59 PM

"canonical" directives do not work the same way as a real redirect does. They are simply suggestions to search engine indexers (not crawlers) to consider using the URL stated in the directive rather than the URL the content was located at.

#3 qwerty

qwerty

    HR 10

  • Moderator
  • 8,695 posts
  • Location:Somerville, MA

Posted 18 April 2015 - 06:31 AM

 

Also, I noticed if you go to a page like [removed] but instead go to the non-www version, it redirects to the homepage, not the same www version? Should it be set up that way?

No, it shouldn't. If this were set up correctly, a request for domain.com/page.htm would redirect to www.domain.com/page.htm, not www.domain.com. Check you .htaccess file and see how this is set up, and while you're at it, check on what the server response code is when this redirect takes place.

 

Regarding the first part of the question, are non-canonical URLs getting indexed by the search engine?



#4 VetoFunk

VetoFunk

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 45 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 18 April 2015 - 08:02 AM

That's the thing Que

 

No, it shouldn't. If this were set up correctly, a request for domain.com/page.htm would redirect to www.domain.com/page.htm, not www.domain.com. Check you .htaccess file and see how this is set up, and while you're at it, check on what the server response code is when this redirect takes place.

 

Regarding the first part of the question, are non-canonical URLs getting indexed by the search engine?

 

That's the thing...it does seem be working. It's actually the default was Magento does it for their product pages etc. It was just strange that the actual code doesn't show in Webmaster Tools under the Fetch by Google tool. I tested the same domain in the Rex Swain Header Tool...and it shows the canonical code, just not in Google's Fetch Tool. Any idea why?



#5 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 33,244 posts

Posted 18 April 2015 - 01:51 PM

Google Webmaster Tools info is generally not up to date.

#6 VetoFunk

VetoFunk

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 45 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 25 April 2015 - 07:12 PM

Fixed the first issue with the redirects. Still confused about the canonical url not showing up in Google Webmaster Tools. For example take a look at this:

 

https://www.google.c... Gold"&filter=0

 

You can see all the duplicates, so it's like the canonical url is not being listened to. If you take a look at the source code, the canonical url is showing up there. But if I login to Google Webmaster Tools, use I FETCH AS GOOGLE it doesn't show up and this canonical code has been there for months (Google doesn't let me copy the code for some reason).

 

Any idea why the canonical tag doesn't show?

 

Jeff

 

----



#7 qwerty

qwerty

    HR 10

  • Moderator
  • 8,695 posts
  • Location:Somerville, MA

Posted 26 April 2015 - 06:09 AM

I'm not sure what you mean about not seeing the rel-canonical code when you fetch as Googlebot (obviously, I can't log in to your Webmaster Tools account),. but of the two pages that are returned for the search you linked to, both are referring to themselves as canonical, and I doubt that's what you want.

 

Usually, the best way to avoid duplicate content with e-commerce pages like this is to use rel-next and rel-prev (as you are), but to point to a "view all" page as canonical, unless such a page would be so long that it provided a bad user experience. I don't think that's going to be an issue for you, unless you've got product categories that include hundreds of products. Certainly, a view all page that consolidates the content of two pages is going to be fine.

 

These pages aren't duplicates of each other, since they offer different products. The problem is that everything other than the products is duplicate. One thing you can do to deal with that issue is to modify the title tag to include the page number.



#8 VetoFunk

VetoFunk

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 45 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 26 April 2015 - 08:04 AM

Hi
 

I'm not sure what you mean about not seeing the rel-canonical code when you fetch as Googlebot (obviously, I can't log in to your Webmaster Tools account),. but of the two pages that are returned for the search you linked to, both are referring to themselves as canonical, and I doubt that's what you want.
 
Usually, the best way to avoid duplicate content with e-commerce pages like this is to use rel-next and rel-prev (as you are), but to point to a "view all" page as canonical, unless such a page would be so long that it provided a bad user experience. I don't think that's going to be an issue for you, unless you've got product categories that include hundreds of products. Certainly, a view all page that consolidates the content of two pages is going to be fine.
 
These pages aren't duplicates of each other, since they offer different products. The problem is that everything other than the products is duplicate. One thing you can do to deal with that issue is to modify the title tag to include the page number.

 
Hi Querty, I do have a next/prev set up for the pages:


<link rel="next" href="http://www.mothersfamilyrings.com/mothers-rings/one-stone-mothers-rings.html?p=2" /><link rel="canonical" href="http://www.mothersfamilyrings.com/mothers-rings/one-stone-mothers-rings.html"/>

<link rel="prev" href="http://www.mothersfamilyrings.com/mothers-rings/one-stone-mothers-rings.html" /><link rel="canonical" href="http://www.mothersfamilyrings.com/mothers-rings/one-stone-mothers-rings.html?p=2"/>
You don't think is correct?
 
Jeff[/size]

Edited by Jill, 28 April 2015 - 12:36 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

We are now a read-only forum.
 
No new posts or registrations allowed.