Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hey there Shahin, make sure your breadcrumbs reflect the path the users took. It's a navigational aid that's meant to help the user and creating a canonical version of the breadcrumbs would just create a confusing experience. If your user was trying to get back to the mountain tours page but the breadcrumbs only listed glacier hiking, wouldn't that be odd? Since the URLs are already canonicalized it shouldn't hurt your SEO to set things up this way.

Great, glad to hear it's working now!

I'd be interested in seeing the research you did showing that Google is using Facebook comments as a ranking signal. I think a correlation definitely exists, and there is supporting evidence for it, but to date I don't believe anyone has proven causation. The best research I've found on the topic is here: http://buzzsumo.com/blog/social-shares-and-inbound-links-insights-from-new-correlation-data/ In short, it states that some content that is shared garners more backlinks depending on the type of content and where it is shared. You should compare this with your research and see if it follows the trend noted here. If you're trying to decide whether to move to AMP or not, consider that you could receive a ranking boost as some have, but you could also be sacrificing your ability to convert as highly as you used to. I like to follow this rule of thumb: publishers yes, everyone else no. We all have to make money somehow and stripping out conversions is not a great way to do it.

Personally, I find it easy enough - simple as a couple of quick clicks. The homepage of Moz.com is in my opinion more of a landing page aimed at attracting new clients and is about their products than existing users. Login and other elements are where I would expect them to be placed on the screen / menu. I would imagine most people are also advanced web users and have bookmarks and alike to make it a one click process as opposed to two/three. How would you improve on them? Surely that is more constructive

How long ago did you implement canonicals to fix the issue? Its important to remember that a lot of SEO isn't about quick fixes. Some of these things will take weeks/months to completely filter through and for you to see the outcomes you were looking for. You could "NoIndex, Follow" the pages if you really wanted to but I'd suggest waiting a bit longer for the canonicals to start working. If the canonicals really don't seem to be working for some/all of those pages, and you don't want to give it more time after a few weeks, then you could reasonably "NoIndex, Follow" the pages... but you could be harming link equity that would have been attributed to the canon page. As for the 301 idea, it would really depend upon what the filtering parameters are doing. If its filtering out sections of a page for users or its helping you determining lead attribution in analytics, then I wouldn't want to indiscriminately 301 them. If they're being autogenerated but have canonicals in them from the start then you should be fine. Like above though, if after a few weeks of them existing with canonicals Google still is throwing duplicate errors at you for those specific pages then you can NonIndex them if you feel it is necessary.

Thanks Martijn, we should be all right then. Appreciate your help!