to determine cross domain is working correctly

[batikmerah]

hello guys

what is the sign that cross domain canonical is working correctly?

domainA is new registered domain (2 weeks old) and domainB is old and strong domain

if i have 2 url https://www.domaina.com and https://www.domainb.com where domainA is pointing to domainB

using cache:site operator https://www.domaina.com cache version is https://www.domainb.com ..im assuming cross domain canonical is working as expected?

but https://www.domaina.com/post.html cache version is still at https://www.domaina.com not https://www.domainb.com/post.html , im assuming cross domain does not working correctly at post level ? i have copied everything in <article> </article> from domainB


i was expecting to have 301 effect where power of domainB is transfered to domainA..but it seems isn't working as planned

 

[tazarbm]

https://www.domaina.com and https://www.domainb.com where domainA is pointing to domainB

i was expecting to have 301 effect where power of domainB is transfered to domainA..but it seems isn't working as planned

that's because you'd have to point domainB to domainA, not the other way around.

but https://www.domaina.com/post.html cache version is still at https://www.domaina.com not https://www.domainb.com/post.html , im assuming cross domain does not working correctly at post level ? i have copied everything in <article> </article> from domainB

I honestly don't understand you... why would you 301 domainA to domainB but EXPECT domainA to show up in the new cache?? Did I misunderstand your question, or what's going on?

But yeah, 301 redirects need to be done on "per URL" level (that is, if you do wish to 301 multiple URLs). Although I think it's possible to 301 all URLs automatically via .htaccess, but I don't know the exact code I'm afraid...

 

[batikmerah]

But yeah, 301 redirects need to be done on "per URL" level (that is, if you do wish to 301 multiple URLs). Although I think it's possible to 301 all URLs automatically via .htaccess, but I don't know the exact code I'm afraid...

its cross domain canonical not 301 redirect ...for example

https://www.abc123.com is new registered domain
https://www.blackhatworld.com is well established domain

from https://www.blackhatworld.com header meta tag we put

<link rel="canonical" href="https://www.abc123.com">

cache version of https://www.blackhatworld.com then will be at https://www.abc123.com

im assuming this is working as expected

but im having issue with post page (having same approach mention above )

 

[ahmet1340]

I think you may have misunderstood the concept of cross domain canonical. It's not the same as a 301 redirect.

 

[batikmerah]

I think you may have misunderstood the concept of cross domain canonical. It's not the same as a 301 redirect.

i do understand... my homepage works as expected and i did receive boost ....but my issue is in post url, seems rel canonical not working ...and yes its not the same as 301 in terms of the effect ..ill say only 70%-80% of power of 301 redirect ...

 

[tazarbm]

its cross domain canonical not 301 redirect ...for example

https://www.abc123.com is new registered domain
https://www.blackhatworld.com is well established domain

from https://www.blackhatworld.com header meta tag we put

<link rel="canonical" href="https://www.abc123.com">

cache version of https://www.blackhatworld.com then will be at https://www.abc123.com

im assuming this is working as expected

but im having issue with post page (having same approach mention above )

oh, I've misread the whole thing, sorry...

Yeah, canonical tags are "per URL" cases, meaning that if you put the canonical in the header of the homepage google MIGHT consider only the homepage between the homepage and a few other similar pages, so if you have more than 1 group of pages that need to be canonicalized you'd need to canonicalize each page in its respective group.

What I've just said could be complicated to understand, but it's actually simple: you just use canonical when you have 2+ pages that are similar and wish google to prefer 1 over the other. But if you have few / several groups of pages that are similar to other pages in their group then you need to canonicalize ALL of the main pages in each group.

For example....

(group 1)
- homepage
- inner page 3
- inner page 8

(group 2)
- inner page 2
- inner page 6

(group 3)
- inner page 1
- inner page 4
- inner page 7

.. and you wish google (well, the search engines, not just google) to prioritize homepage from group 1, page 6 from group 2, and page 4 from group 3 then you would add...

<link href="https://whateveryourdomainis.com" rel="canonical"> between the homepage's HEAD tags
<link href="https://whateveryourdomainis.com/inner-page-6" rel="canonical"> between the HEAD tags of inner page 6
<link href="https://whateveryourdomainis.com/inner-page-4" rel="canonical"> between the HEAD tags of inner page 4

and this would let google choose to show / rank the canonicalized pages (homepage, page 6, page 4) over the other clones in their groups.

And yes, you canonicalized your homepage correctly, but please notice that I said earlier that "... google MIGHT consider..." instead of saying that "... google WILL consider..." and this is important because google can choose to ignore the canonicals if they want, or if they feel / know that other (stronger) signals on your site indicate the non-canonical pages to be better / more relevant. Which is probably why you're seeing 70-80% of the impact of a 301 redirect instead of getting the full 100% benefit.

And which is why 301-ing while doing away with canonicals and clones is better in my opinion. If you don't care about the non-canonical versions of your other pages (that are similar to the canonicalized one) simply delete the canonical, and 301 the clones to the (previously) canonicalized pages

But if you do need the clones / the pages that are similar to the homepage, keep the canonical tag as it is, and also add the canonical tag to the other main pages in their respective groups and don't worry about what google caches. Of course, you might not get 100% of the benefits of a 301, but if you need those clones / similar pages you do need to compromise I'm afraid...

 

[Pirsultan]

it need to be identical

 

[batikmerah]

oh, I've misread the whole thing, sorry...

<link href="https://whateveryourdomainis.com" rel="canonical"> between the homepage's HEAD tags
<link href="https://whateveryourdomainis.com/inner-page-6" rel="canonical"> between the HEAD tags of inner page 6
<link href="https://whateveryourdomainis.com/inner-page-4" rel="canonical"> between the HEAD tags of inner page 4

and this would let google choose to show / rank the canonicalized pages (homepage, page 6, page 4) over the other clones in their groups.

And yes, you canonicalized your homepage correctly, but please notice that I said earlier that "... google MIGHT consider..." instead of saying that "... google WILL consider..." and this is important because google can choose to ignore the canonicals if they want, or if they feel / know that other (stronger) signals on your site indicate the non-canonical pages to be better / more relevant. Which is probably why you're seeing 70-80% of the impact of a 301 redirect instead of getting the full 100% benefit.

yeah that's whats i did ...technical detail is copying exactly whats in

<article> </article>

keeping exacly formating text style such as ul, bold etc ....homepage section is fine as i said earlier , but post section are not getting picked up ....seems just copy <artcile> </artcile> are not enough to rel canonical to be working

 

[tazarbm]

but post section are not getting picked up ....seems just copy <artcile> </artcile> are not enough to rel canonical to be working

probably google doesn't consider it important / relevant enough