HTML Logo by World Wide Web Consortium (www.w3.org). Click to learn more about our commitment to accessibility and standards.

Moving forward with Composr

ocPortal has been relaunched as Composr CMS, which is now in beta. ocPortal 9 will be superseded by Composr 10.

Head over to compo.sr for our new site, and to our migration roadmap. Existing ocPortal member accounts have been mirrored.


More Google Webmaster Tools and canonical links

Login / Search

 [ Join | More ]
 Add topic 
Posted
Rating:
#87058 (In Topic #17763)
Avatar

Community saint

My site remains over-indexed with 48,500 links currently in Google's index. This, of course, dilutes page rank over several URLs. This number goes down, then up, then down, so maybe this is just a Google issue with being consistent about not indexing the non-canonical links.

I use URL monikers and the new short-style URLs. I am curious if the following parameters are excluded when using this setup. Here is a sampling of parameters:

Code

view   30,770   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
only_search_meta   2,236   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
content   2,234   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
all_defaults   2,234   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
date   1,891   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
day   1,889   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
max   1,664   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_9   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_8   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_7   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_5   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_4   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_3   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_2   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_12   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_11   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_10   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_1   1,528   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset

Are the above parameters excluded so that URLs including them are sent to Google as non-canonical?

Thanks for any insight.

Bob



Back to the top
 
Posted
Rating:
#87064
Avatar

'view' determines view mode of calendar (day/week/month/year) so is important.

'only_search_meta' / 'content' / 'all_defaults' are related to search and we'll mark them non-canonical.

'date'/'day' relate to recurrences of calendar events. We'll mark them non-canonical for events that don't have "segregate recurrences" enabled.

'max' should be non-canonical. I found a few places in the code where it wasn't marked as such.

'int_*' is already marked as non-canonical.


Become a fan of ocPortal on Facebook or add me as a friend. Add me on on Twitter.
Was I helpful?
  • If not, please let us know how we can do better (please try and propose any bigger ideas in such a way that they are fundable and scalable).
  • If so, please let others know about ocPortal whenever you see the opportunity.
  • If my reply is too Vulcan or expressed too much in business-strategy terms, and not particularly personal, I apologise. As a company & project maintainer, time is very limited to me, so usually when I write a reply I try and make it generic advice to all readers. I'm also naturally a joined-up thinker, so I always express my thoughts in combined business and technical terms. I recognise not everyone likes that, don't let my Vulcan-thinking stop you enjoying ocPortal on fun personal projects.
  • If my response can inspire a community tutorial, that's a great way of giving back to the project as a user.
Back to the top
 
Important!
Posted
Rating:
#87065
Avatar

Automated fix message

BobS said

My site remains over-indexed with 48,500 links currently in Google's index. This, of course, dilutes page rank over several URLs. This number goes down, then up, then down, so maybe this is just a Google issue with being consistent about not indexing the non-canonical links.

I use URL monikers and the new short-style URLs. I am curious if the following parameters are excluded when using this setup. Here is a sampling of parameters:

Code

view   30,770   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
only_search_meta   2,236   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
content   2,234   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
all_defaults   2,234   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
date   1,891   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
day   1,889   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
max   1,664   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_9   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_8   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_7   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_5   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_4   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_3   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_2   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_12   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_11   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_10   1,529   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset
int_1   1,528   -   -   Let Googlebot decide   Edit / Reset

Are the above parameters excluded so that URLs including them are sent to Google as non-canonical?

Thanks for any insight.

Bob



This issue has been filed on the tracker as issue #607, with a fix.


Become a fan of ocPortal on Facebook or add me as a friend. Add me on on Twitter.
Was I helpful?
  • If not, please let us know how we can do better (please try and propose any bigger ideas in such a way that they are fundable and scalable).
  • If so, please let others know about ocPortal whenever you see the opportunity.
  • If my reply is too Vulcan or expressed too much in business-strategy terms, and not particularly personal, I apologise. As a company & project maintainer, time is very limited to me, so usually when I write a reply I try and make it generic advice to all readers. I'm also naturally a joined-up thinker, so I always express my thoughts in combined business and technical terms. I recognise not everyone likes that, don't let my Vulcan-thinking stop you enjoying ocPortal on fun personal projects.
  • If my response can inspire a community tutorial, that's a great way of giving back to the project as a user.
Important!
 
Posted
Rating:
#87066
Avatar

Community saint

Dang, you're quick, Chris. Thanks for looking into this.

It seems a good portion of this is just Google being Google. I'm not sure how big a stick you need to hit them with before they realize that your "suggestions" are in fact correct and then index accordingly.

Bob
Back to the top
 
Posted
Rating:
#87067
Avatar

Community saint

Chris-

I meant to attach the full table of parameters but I forgot to attach the file. Below are the additional parameters, some of which look like they should be marked non-canonical:

Code

Parameter   URLs monitored
page   1359
type   1299
utheme   1171
zone   1171
search_catalogue_entries   1119
wide_high   1072
back   1065
wide_print   900
order   576
id   464
search_images   398
start   289
rand   276
search_under   261
search_news   221
search_galleries   218
for_session   207
search_catalogue_categories   192
search_calendar   188
from   167
title   157
days   133
search_comcode_page   131
search_comcode_pages   131
search_gallery   131
catalogue   128
probe_id   127
probe_type   127
keep_has_js   120
thumb   106
no_count   105

Sorry for missing this the first time.

Bob
Back to the top
 
Posted
Rating:
#87068
Avatar

'order' and 'back' were notable. The rest are either already non-canonical, should always be there, or were made non-canonical in my post above.


Become a fan of ocPortal on Facebook or add me as a friend. Add me on on Twitter.
Was I helpful?
  • If not, please let us know how we can do better (please try and propose any bigger ideas in such a way that they are fundable and scalable).
  • If so, please let others know about ocPortal whenever you see the opportunity.
  • If my reply is too Vulcan or expressed too much in business-strategy terms, and not particularly personal, I apologise. As a company & project maintainer, time is very limited to me, so usually when I write a reply I try and make it generic advice to all readers. I'm also naturally a joined-up thinker, so I always express my thoughts in combined business and technical terms. I recognise not everyone likes that, don't let my Vulcan-thinking stop you enjoying ocPortal on fun personal projects.
  • If my response can inspire a community tutorial, that's a great way of giving back to the project as a user.
Back to the top
 
Posted
Rating:
#87069
Avatar

Community saint

Thanks again, Chris. Sorry I forgot to include the full list the first time.

Bob
Back to the top
 
1 guests and 0 members have just viewed this: None
Control functions:

Quick reply   Contract

Your name:
Your message: