Hot answers tagged

3

You need to have two webmaster tools profiles, one for www.example.com and the other for example.com. From now on, you should be looking on example.com webmaster tools profile. Also you need to specify in the webmaster tools that you prefer the non-www domain, go to site settings Site Settings Preferred domain Don't set a preferred domain Display ...


2

It’s technically allowed: RFC 6596 allows relative URLs: Specify a relative IRI (see [RFC3986], Section 4.2). RFC 3986 defines that a protocol-relative URL is some kind of relative reference: A relative reference that begins with two slash characters is termed a network-path reference […] It can become a problem if the document is accessible ...


2

Nope, you cannot link to Page A in your hreflang markup if page A says it's a duplicate of page B. You'll end up getting errors in Google Search Console for missing return tags.


2

I am now in the horrible process of changing domains you should 301 the old to the new, all urls, one by one. Don't canonicalize old urls - canonical is just a recommendation, and you use it in wrong way. Canonical doesn't replace redirect - it signalize to search engines, an url's content is slightly similar to its canonical url. What you should do is to ...


1

No, a noindex isn't necessary. The canonical link element should ensure that only the canonical version is returned in search results – so no duplicates – and will benefit from "ranking signals" of the canonicalised (i.e. variant) pages. https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139066?hl=en


1

This is an example of what a canonical tag tries to fix: If the parameters do not modify the content of the webpage, then you shouldn't include it as a canonical url. Some common examples include: sorting parameters or mailing campaign parameters such as utm_parameters. They will display the same content, so marking them as canonical would probably lead to ...


1

No, you wouldn't include tracking parameters in the canonical link element. It's certainly not true to say that the "general way to do this [set canonical URLs] should include any URL parameters". Most often, the canonical link element is being used, at least in part, to exclude parameters. What is the correct approach to canonicalisation will differ by ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible