New answers tagged canonical-url
Your og:url tag is currently: <meta property="og:url" content="http://prodct.info/chromebooks/" /> Should it not be the unique URL of the page? Be sure to test any changes with Webmaster's Structured Data Testing Tool Description of og:url: The canonical URL of your object that will be used as its permanent ID in the graph.
One solution would be to not show the rel canonical meta tag when Facebook is crawling the page. Facebook's bot uses a user agent string that contains "facebookexternalhit". If "facebookexternalhit" is in the user agent, then don't show the meta tag. Note that showing different content to a robot is called "cloaking". I haven't seen any evidence that ...
Here is Google's position from an archived live chat session (the link is now dead): *Does inconsistent capitalization of URLs cause duplicate content issues and dilution of page rank? For example www.site.com/abc vs www.site.com/Abc. On Windows hosts, these are the same page, but are different pages on Unix hosts. JohnMu: Hi John, based on the ...
Two of the most widely used web servers have very different settings for case sensitivity of URLs by default. Whether or not your URLs are case sensitive is likely a function of which you are using: Microsoft IIS - case insensitive URLs - shows the same content regardless of capitalization. Apache HTTPD Server - case sensitive URLs - gives a 404 not ...
RFC 3986 22.214.171.124 defines URIs as case-insensitive, so it is not a good idea to make them case-sensitive like wordpress.org does.
Each URL on your site has its own PageRank. So http://example.com/?id=344 will have separate PageRank from http://example.com/ and both will have separate PageRank from http://example.com/page.html. In many cases a URL parameter will not cause the page shown to change, or will cause a 404 not found error. Either of those may cause the link juice ...
This is one way people canonicalise duplicate product pages on ecommerce and is a valid way to use it. As long as the content on the product page is identical, or a large part of the content is exact and appears on both pages. If the pages are not extremely close in exact words, the canonical designation might be disregarded by search engines. For the most ...
Sure, cross-domain is fine. Using .mobi was very popular for a while, other sites just use "m.theirdomain.com", it's essentially up to you. Keep in mind that multiple domains for the same site does increase the maintenance overhead, but that's ultimately your decision.
Top 50 recent answers are included