Canonical conflicts with NOINDEX?1 Recommended Answer
Will a NOINDEX rule stop a canonical tag from being read?
This is definitely an interesting question :-). Before the rel=canonical link element was announced, using noindex robots meta tags was one way that webmasters were directing us towards canonicals, so this is certainly something we know and understand. However, with the coming of the rel=canonical link element, the optimal way of specifying a canonical is (apart from using a 301 redirect to the preferred URL) is to only use the rel=canonical link element.
One reason for this is that we sometimes find a non-canonical URL first. If this URL has a noindex robots meta tag, we might decide not to index anything until we crawl and index the canonical URL. Without the noindex robots meta tag (with the rel=canonical link element) we can start by indexing that URL and show it to users in search results. As soon as we crawl the canonical URL, we can change to the canonical URL instead. It's also much safer because you don't have to worry about serving different versions of the content depending on the exact URL :-).
One thing that you have to also remember is that (as Cristina mentioned and as is mentioned in the blog post) the rel=canonical link element is considered a hint that helps us to recognize the canonical URL. It is not an explicit directive and therefore it might take a bit before it takes affect (so just be patient while things settle down :-)).
Hope it helps!
Technically, the bot has to crawl the page to see the NoIndex....
so it may see the canonical link.
Whether it wopuld take the hint from a page being noindexed or not..... hmmmm
>>> Will a NOINDEX rule stop a canonical tag from being read?
I'd say of course not. 'Noindex' doesn't mean the site is not being read by the bot (could have a 'noindex,follow' there for instance), it just won't show in the index later.
you do not need a meta noindex tag,
because the link rel="canonical" points search engines to the URL you want indexed in search results,
with a content similar to the URL that contains the link rel="canonical" tag.
I think if possible you should have one or the other, not both.
If the canonical URL appears only in link rel="canonical" tags, you will need anyway
other ways for search engines to find the canonical URL,
like proper <a> links to the canonical URLs, and the sitemap.
Another thing is that link rel="canonical" is relatively new,
and it seems sometimes to be considered a 'hint', more than a directive,
so the answer to your question can only be
'try and see what happens'.
Matt Cutts speaking as an official Google employee has said that canonical is not fail safe, only a "suggestion" - so I would say luzie is right.
1) http: // mysite.com / cars / big / redones.php
2) http: // www.mysite.com / cars / big / redones.php
3) https: // www.mysite.com / cars / big / redones.php
4) http: // www.mysite.com / cars / big / redones.php ? startnumber=1 & numitems=10
5) http: // www.mysite.com / cars / big / redones.php ? startnumber=1 & numitems=25
6) http: // www.mysite.com / cars / big / redones.php ? startnumber=21 & numitems=10
7) http: // www.mysite.com / cars / big / redones.php ? startnumber=1 & numitems=10
8) https: // www.mysite.com / cars / big / redones.php ? sort=price_asc
9) https: // www.mysite.com / cars / big / redones.php ? sort=price_desc
10) http: // www.mysite.com / cars / big / redones.php ? startnumber=1 & numitems=10 & sort=price_asc
1) http: // www.mysite.com / cars / big / redones.php ? startnumber=5 & numitems=10
1, 2 and 3 should be handled via Server based directives - 301 permanent Redirects.
1, 2 and 3 should be handled with Correct FUll/Absolute URLs in Links
1, 2 and 3 should be handled by using hte preferred one Only in any SE Sitemap(s) (if used)
4 - 10 are repeats/variants/partial duplications.
(NOTE: 11 is Not a duplciate/variant - it is likely to be showing content not found on the other URLs as it is Not use variant parameters!)
Such URLs should havea NoFollow applied to the Links.
Such URLs should/Could have NoIndex applied.
Such URLs should/Could have canonical applied.
Does that make sense?
Some community members might have badges that indicate their identity or level of participation in a community.
Member levels indicate a user's level of participation in a forum. The greater the participation, the higher the level. Everyone starts at level 1 and can rise to level 10. These activities can increase your level in a forum:
- Post an answer.
- Having your answer selected as the best answer.
- Having your post rated as helpful.
- Vote up a post.
- Correctly mark a topic or post as abuse.
Having a post marked and removed as abuse will slow a user's advance in levels.
View profile in forum?
To view this member's profile, you need to leave the current Help page.
Report abuse in forum?
This comment originated in the Google Product Forum. To report abuse, you need to leave the current Help page.
Reply in forum?
This comment originated in the Google Product Forum. To reply, you need to leave the current Help page.