Canonical link from SEO view?

[Dmyles]

Hi there, what happens in Google when we add source link or canonical URL to our post? Will that post still worth to rank? Or Google will ignore apart from indexing it?

 

[Thriveink]

Interesting question. I've never thought about this before. Following your thread to know the answer.

 

[SeedPhrase]

Check this

https://moz.com/learn/seo/canonical... (aka "rel,content appearing on multiple URLs.

 

[Dmyles]

Check this

Well. That doesn't explain about ranking benefits.

 

[Kenobii]

Google will prioritize the page that Canonical URL is linking to.
I have tested this.

 

[Dmyles]

Google will prioritize the page that Canonical URL is linking to.
I have tested this.

Yeah. It will prioritize to that linking page. I get it. But what about the blog that use syndicate content? Will it receive any traffic? Atleast minimal amount of traffic?

 

[Kenobii]

Yeah. It will prioritize to that linking page. I get it. But what about the blog that use syndicate content? Will it receive any traffic? Atleast minimal amount of traffic?

According to my test, it's not on any page of Google, but it's indexed.

 

[Dmyles]

According to my test, it's not on any page of Google, but it's indexed.

No keyword ranking?

 

[Infatica]

Hi there, what happens in Google when we add source link or canonical URL to our post?

We're signaling to the Googlebot that the given page with the canonical tag is, essentially, a copy and it points to the original page -- the page that we want to rank.

Will that post still worth to rank? Or Google will ignore apart from indexing it?

An anecdote from my personal experience: A page with the canonical tag can still outrank the original page -- this happened when I posted an article to Medium. Despite inputting the canonical tag, the Medium article was 2-3 positions higher.

More info here: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139066?hl=en

 

[Kenobii]

No keyword ranking?

No

 

[Dmyles]

We're signaling to the Googlebot that the given page with the canonical tag is, essentially, a copy and it points to the original page -- the page that we want to rank.

An anecdote from my personal experience: A page with the canonical tag can still outrank the original page -- this happened when I posted an article to Medium. Despite inputting the canonical tag, the Medium article was 2-3 positions higher.

More info here: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139066?hl=en

That cleared my doubt. Thanks. What's best thing to do when we use syndicate content. Source link or Canonical URL?

 

[Dmyles]

No

Oh. But @Infatica it might outrank the original source sometimes.

 

[SirLouen]

If you put a canonical rel link it won't rank. If it was already ranking, it will take a time to unrank.
From a SEO standpoint it makes not sense putting a canonical link unless you are using it for obvious purposes (avoiding cannibalization)
Think on a canonical as a "soft 301 redirect".

 

[insaneseoguy]

Google will consider main page that has been used instead of canonical to rank first , but i have seen some people that declare their main page as canonical of itself, that also works fine.

 

[Dmyles]

If you put a canonical rel link it won't rank. If it was already ranking, it will take a time to unrank.
From a SEO standpoint it makes not sense putting a canonical link unless you are using it for obvious purposes (avoiding cannibalization)
Think on a canonical as a "soft 301 redirect".

What's your view on auto blogging?

 

[curious_]

An anecdote from my personal experience: A page with the canonical tag can still outrank the original page -- this happened when I posted an article to Medium. Despite inputting the canonical tag, the Medium article was 2-3 positions higher.

@Infatica is there a solution for this? I have the same issue – even when canonical on Мedium post points to my blog, the Мedium article perfectly well while by blog doesn’t Any proven methods for fixing this?