Virtual inlcude v.s. Redirect 301

[JoostBruining]

Hi there,

I manage a website which use a lot virtual includes ( SSI) because it caused a lot of duplicate content i introduced the Canonical url tag. But i still see bad rankings on some pages who are the leading of the virtual includes. Now i'am wondering is it better to remove all the virtual include pages ( url's) and make a redirect 301 of it. Does anybody know that is better for ranking the head page?

[StreamlineMetrics]

It's hard to say without seeing your site and seeing how the virtual includes are set up, but if you are still having issues ranking with only the pages that use the virtual includes, then it might be a good idea to set them up as 301 redirects. But again, I can't say for sure unless I saw the site, can you share it here?

[JoostBruining]

Hi Thanx for your response

the original page is: gsmweb(dot)nl(slash)iphone(slash)5sdot)htm
the ranking is again bad this week. last week #18 and now #33
the include pages are:gsmweb(dot)nl(slash)iphone(slash)5.htm
gsmweb(dot)nl(slash)iphone(slash)5s-16gb.htm
gsmweb(dot)nl(slash)iphone(slash)5-32gb.htm

[StreamlineMetrics]

Hmm, I am seeing your original page rank #7 for "iphone 5s abonnement" here in the US on Google.com and then #3 when I try searching on Google.nl... are you still seeing them at #33?

And, do the include pages have any original content or are they exact duplicates? Rather than redirecting them, I might suggest putting original content on them in order to rank for each individual product.

[JoostBruining]

yes that's correct on "iphone 5s abonnement" and "phone 5s aanbieding" i am sattisfied. I am concerned with the keyword iPhone 5s. with that my page is going up and down and don't know why.
the include pages are exact duplicates with a canonical url in it.