Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

29

There's no circularity implied by having <link rel='canonical' href='http://www.example.com/product/foo' /> appear as http://www.example.com/product/foo. That's the intent. You're saying "the best URL" for this page is http://www.example.com/product/foo, so when the search engines hit http://www.example.com/product/foo?id=1, or ...


12

Yes, if you have your URLs redirected properly. Yes. You should be using a 301 redirect instead of internally rewriting the URLs. No, this is completely unnecessary. If your old URLs are 301 redirected to the new URLs, then Google will know that those resources have been permanently renamed/moved. That's the whole point of having a 301 redirect code (as ...


10

If you don't specifically tell Google your preference you will probably have duplicate content issues. There is more then one way to inform Google of your preferred domain: Do a 301 redirect to use the 'www' or no 'www' Specify your preferred domain in Google Webmaster Tools Use canonical URLs (although it isn't typically used in this situation)


10

Google's Duplicate Content webmaster guide defines duplicate content (for purposes of search engine optimization) as "substantive blocks of content within or across domains that either completely match other content or are appreciably similar". Google's guide goes on to list the following as examples of duplicate content: Discussion forums that can ...


7

I'm going to answer this from an SEO perspective since the comments on your question do a good job of addressing the other issues at hand. Because the pages on your site will have very little content (I am assuming you are showing an image and possibly a description of it) if your pages have the same <title> and <h1> tags they will be very ...


7

About a year ago Google tackled this problem by creating Source Attribution meta tags: syndication-source: this meta tag is used to point to the long-lived (bookmarkable) URL of the original article. This should be used on all pages that republish the syndicated content, but it can also be used on the original page to point to itself as the syndication ...


7

Search engines index pages by URL, and duplicate content is content that's found at more than one URL - see this for more: What is Duplicate Content? Search engines would only penalize content appearing more than once on the same page if it appears to be spammy or an attempt at keyword stuffing. Incorporating different menus and layout structures would not ...


7

It's very simple how it works: Google sees 2 or more sites with the same content. It's not gonna show you all of them, because it's not really a good resultpage if everything is the same. So it starts to decide which of the sites will be shown. It does this based on a few factors like: - Which site had it first (on same publish date, this is THE FIRST ...


6

Is it legal to use translated comments from other sites? Depends upon the terms and conditions set forth by the website whose content you are using. Most sites, by default, don't allow others to use their content without their permission. Other sites, like the Stack Exchange sites, are released under a creative commons license. If the content you want ...


6

Unfortunately, having the same content on a mobile page would be considered a duplicate. This is among the few legitimate sources of inevitable content duplication, along with syndicated content and news/blog homepages. But if you just have a single URL for each page and simply switching the CSS based on cookies, then there's really only one page. This is ...


6

Canonical URLs are per page, not per website. So if you are using a canonical URL it must point to the page it is a duplicate of, not the website that page resides on. And actually you both are wrong. You don't use canonical URLs for this. You are supposed to use a 301 redirect to indicate that a page has moved to a new URL. Canonical URLs are to indicate ...


6

Google will be able to detect that the text you entered correlates to the form, you won't be penalized for duplicate content. Google will only hold content against you when the entire (or majority of) page content is duplicated (often including meta tags etc), So no it won't be held against you! :)


6

Personally I would do the opposite canonical - ie set /texas/houston as canon instead of /houston - the main reason being to avoid name clashes with identical names in other states. A URL of /springfield could be a little confusing, even if you are showing a specific Springfield page. You also get an extra keyword in the URL. Secondly, I would always prefer ...


5

Duplicate content penalties are enforced to reduce the amount of useless content on the web and having redundant results in SERPs. Translating content into a different language is neither useless nor redundant. Someone who can't read English but reads Turkish won't be able to consume an English article. So it makes no sense for Google to discourage the ...


5

Specify the canonical URL. <link rel="canonical" href="/deutschland/Bayern/Camping-Allweglehen-19062">


5

Yes, you should use a 301 permanent Redirect from .com to .org else google will mark one of the domain for duplicate content and that is not somwthing you want. Create a .htaccess file with the below code, it will ensure that all requests coming in to domain.com will get redirected to www.domain.org The .htaccess file needs to be placed in the root ...


5

Assume that you can't reuse content unless told otherwise. Unless the page specifically states that the content is licensed for reuse under a Creative Commons licence or similar, or the work is in the public domain, you should assume that content is not licensed for reuse, and not reuse it in any way. You can find content that is licensed for reuse with ...


5

If you're using canonical URLs, and you are, you're fine. Canonical URLs were created for the very scenario you are experiencing. Don't change or worry about a thing. :)


5

How much new content do I have to add to the wikipedia source to avoid being marked as duplicate content and penalised in my SEO? That question may raise a few eyebrows, as it appears as though you are asking what bare minimum percentage of change is necessary to avoid spam detection (which raises the question of whether or not you are attempting to ...


5

Use canonical URLs


5

rel=translation has been proposed but not adopted by the W3C (it's not in the HTML5 working document). If the words on the pages are different then Google won't penalize you for duplicate content (several people say this in the Webmaster forums). There's lots of advice on multi-language sites in this blog post.


5

Given the incredible popularity of Google (it is 90% of incoming traffic on Stack Overflow, for example), couldn't you simply check the referer? Example referer strings from search engines: www.bing.com/search?q=javascript+date+to+timestamp&src=IE-SearchBox&FORM=IE8SRC ...


5

They were right to do that although a canonical URL would have also sufficed. Technically speaking those are two different URLs and thus considered two different pages. So the 301 redirect, or canonical URL, tells Google that both are the same page and to handle it accordingly.


5

There is no point having two websites with the same content and the same TLD. One is going to be seen as a duplicate of the other and Google is not going to list both in the SERPs. The domain name is only a small metric that Google uses in order to determine relevance in the results. You are better of, either: Concentrate on one domain. Pick one domain ...


5

If you're aggregating from other sources, it doesn't matter if you think the way it's combined is unique and a valuable user experience - it's still flying pretty close to duplicate content. I'd be more worried about that than linking out to Wikipedia. There's no way you would be tripping any SEO red flags by linking out to a source site like that. Citing ...


5

While its not bad advice from the SEO company I do feel its a little incomplete, there's a tag that you can use on your pages to avoid duplicates finding their way into the index of search engines such as Google. Better Advice The better advice from the SEO company would be to ensure that your using Rel Canonical on your pages so no pages ever end up in ...


5

No there is not, Google will reflect the changes when it crawls and processes your pages again. This whole process may take from days to weeks and you can't force Google to do it right away. Even if those conflicts are already solved, they could still be showing up in Webmaster Tools.


5

Let me give you practical answer. If yours is heavy backlink profile from high worth sites then chances of Panda penalty will be much less than if you hadn't. Secondly if you're copying articles "as is" then it is adding to internet spam. Everyone wastes time and energy on such sites. Google abhors such sites. These ways you can help reduce web spam: So ...


4

It is duplicate content but they are the ones who will be hit with duplicate content penalties and issues as they are the ones republishing your work. Google has recently made improvements to their algorithm to deal with this and ensure that the original publisher gets credit for the work but it still isn't perfect. However, you can help yo mitigate this by ...


4

Most sites out there will have these partial duplication of content to some degree. If it's not navigation, it's imprint info, colophon or other header/footer text. So I'm sure Google tolerates some level of duplicate content. It's all about degrees. If there's only a 5~6% overlap in content between pages, then it'll probably be fine. Excerpts aren't that ...



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