Duplicate content and canonicalization confusion

[IM_Learner]

Hello,

http://bit.ly/1b48Lmp and http://bit.ly/1BuJkUR pages have same content and their canonical refers to the page itself. Yet, they rank in search engines. Is it because they have been targeted to different geographical locations? If so, still the content is same.

Please help me clear this confusion.

Regards

[Alick300]

Hi,

I am sharing two Matt cutts video on this to clear your confusion.I hope it helps.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFf1gwr6HJw

http://searchengineland.com/googles-matt-cutts-duplicate-content-wont-hurt-you-unless-it-is-spammy-167459

Thanks

[Linda-Vassily]

Yes, if they were directly competing against each other, you'd expect one of them to drop out of the rankings. What are they both ranking for?

If they are both showing up in the same search, my guess would be that they are very new and Google hasn't noticed the duplication.

But if you see the ranking in different searches (like Google UK and Google India), then you are probably right, Google does not see them as duplicate since they are being shown to different audiences.

[DonnaDuncan]

Canonical pages still get indexed at Google's discretion.

A related question was asked in March 2013 that I think, explains what you're seeing. I've cut and pasted the relevant part below. Mememax is the author.

"Normally the only thing which will prevent a page from ranking is noindex tag. If you don't want to have it indexed just noindex it, if that page has been laready indexed, put the noindex tag and delete from index using GWT option.

Concerning the canonical tag thing, it will consolidate the seo value in one page but it won't prevent those page to appear in rankings, however you may have two cases:

• the two or more pages are identical. In that case google may accept the canonicalization and show always the original page.

• the two or more pages are slightly different, it's the case of paginated pages which are canonicalized using rel next/prev. In that sense the whole value will be consolidated in page 1 but then the page which will be shown in the rankings will be the one which responds to that query, for example if someone is looking for blue glass, google will return the page which shows blue glass listing if that's different from the first one."

[IM_Learner]

Thanks everyone for the response! But I am still confused. The two links that I have posted in my initial question have exactly the same content on both the pages (targeted at different geographic locations) and their canonical tags do not refer to any master page but to them itself, i.e. canonical tag on page A refers to A and canonical tag on page B refers to B. Please take a look at both the pages: http://bit.ly/1b48Lmp and http://bit.ly/1BuJkUR

Regards

[DonnaDuncan]

This might help Shailendra - https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139066?hl=en. Skim down to (or search for) the part beginning with "This indicates the preferred URL", about half-way down the page.

Bottom line, Google attempts to respect canonical tags but it's no guarantee. Increase your chances by using "absolute paths rather than relative paths with the rel="canonical" link element".

[IM_Learner]

Thanks for the reply Donna but my question is bit different. Could you please take a look at the rel canonical tag of the urls I posted. The content on both the pages is 100% same. The only difference is that they are targeted at different geographic locations. The canonical tags point to the page itself and not any master page.

[DonnaDuncan]

Okay. Let's start over looking at it from a goal perspective. I compared the two pages. Here is the difference between the two in terms of page text, highlighted in yellow - http://63.249.66.211/comparison.html. The differences are in the URL, the phone numbers at the top, a word here and there in the middle, and the 2nd block of text and photo under "Explore Our Solutions".

The first page, which I'll call India, has a canoncial tag pointing to itself. (http://www.sap.com/**india**/pc/bp/erp.html"/>) .

The second page, which I'll call UK, has a canoncial tag, also pointing to itself. (http://www.sap.com/**uk**/pc/bp/erp.html"/>).

• If you want both pages to rank and have authority, then you use the canonical tag. You need to use the same canonical tag on both pages. Right now they're different. That will essentially tell Google to treat the two pages as one; to show one or the other in search results, but considate their combined SEO value into one for ranking purposes.
• If you only want one page to rank, then noindex the other.

Does that make more sense?

[IM_Learner]

Thanks a ton Donna for looking into the issue and helping at this level. I highly appreciate it

Their canonical tags confused me. As you have mentioned, the tags should have been one, I don't know why they are using two different ones. Probably, they have set the different geographic targets in Google Webmaster Tools and with the minor content variation and canonical tags, they want to signal Google to treat both the pages differently. I mean it's a big name in the world of ERP. They can't mess up with the canonical tags.

What do you think?

[DonnaDuncan]

I agree with you. It's all very confusing and little details make a BIG difference. Thanks for sticking with this.