Same product in two categories (linked) - how does Google treat this ??

[shags38]

With the copy / link products feature how does Google treat this?

example from one of my websites www.harmonyball.net.au - main category is 'Harmony Balls' (surprise)

I want the same items to be ranked for 'gifts for her' search in Google ... so by creating a category ' gifts for her' and linking all the products to this category and setting meta title (and description) to focus on this , e.g. ' Gifts for Her | Harmony Balls make Wonderful Gifts for Her' does Google take any notice of the listings in this category and specifically list these items also in the search category 'gifts for her' - or is the linking / copy feature just for internal navigation? (blocked from robots?)

cheers,
Mike

[RodG]

With the copy / link products feature how does Google treat this?

If ZenCart didn't use canonical links, Google would treat them as duplicate pages. You will effectively be competing with yourself for rankings.

example from one of my websites www.harmonyball.net.au - main category is 'Harmony Balls' (surprise)

I've already said this in another thread, but this is bad news waiting to happen. Spaces should NOT be used for category or filenames. Replace them with a hyphen or underscore (-_).

I want the same items to be ranked for 'gifts for her' search in Google ... so by creating a category ' gifts for her'

This is asking for even bigger problems - two spaces. Use 'gifts_for_her' instead.

and linking all the products to this category and setting meta title (and description) to focus on this , e.g. ' Gifts for Her | Harmony Balls make Wonderful Gifts for Her'

Uhuh.

does Google take any notice of the listings in this category and specifically list these items also in the search category 'gifts for her'

Google will index what it finds, where it finds them, so without the use of canonical links it will see the same content in multiple categories as duplicate content. Something to be avoided.

- or is the linking / copy feature just for internal navigation?

Google will see the site and any links exactly the same as a human would with a WebBrowser.

(blocked from robots?)

Unless *you* add rules for the blocking, then they won't be blocked from the bots.

Consider this: You have a product with the ID '1234'
The default category for this product has an ID of '45'

The URL to this product, in this category, will be something like
http://www.yourdomain.com/index.php?...oducts_id=1234

Now, lets assume you link this product to categoryID '67' - This same product will now have two URL's - the original, plus
http://www.yourdomain.com/index.php?...oducts_id=1234

Google will see these as being duplicate content (even though there will be a *minor* difference if breadcrumbs are enabled/shown).
Not enough for Google to see them as *different* pages/content.

If you allow this, one of them will be dropped from the search results. You have no say witch one will be penalised (google has no way of knowing which is the 'original' and which is the dupe.

This is where the canonical links come into play. When working (and by default, I think) - These links are created *without* the cPath (category) information - So using the product '1234' as an example, the canonical link for both of the example URL's will be identical, looking something like

http://www.yourdomain.com/index.php?...oducts_id=1234

This is the URL that will show up in the Google *results* (for any given query) - It is as though the category doesn't even exist and because Google now only 'knows' of the URL with no cPath, the product appears as being a single page with no dupes.

SO... on this basis, the ZenCart default behaviour *isn't* really what *you* want - Well, at least not what you are asking for.
If you want a search for "Gifts for Her" to show up in search results, then the text "Gifts for Her" needs to be found somewhere on the page. Having a category called 'gifts for her' will achieve this due to the breadcrumbs (as well as any meta data for the page), but this probably won't be enough for your site to outrank others with the same small mention of the phrase, especially since when Google 'views' the page without the cPath, the phrase/category name won't even appear as a breadcrumb (you can easily try/verify this yourself by editing your URL in your browser.

Now, if you *want* to help drive people to the 'gifts for her' *category* (rather than just the product) you will need to modify ZenCarts default behaviour so the canonical link it creates is the one to this particular category - IOW, it will need to look something like

http://www.yourdomain.com/index.php?...oducts_id=1234 (where category '45' == 'Gifts for her').

With this modification in place, when Google crawls the other category(s) with this same product, it will effectively 'ignore' all of the other categories in its search results and the link it will provide will be to the cPath=45 - IOW, it will help drive the *customers* to that category. The actual results of the search will remain the same.

In other words, a canonical link is telling google "Yes, I know my site contains duplicate content - but this (the canonical link) is the one I prefer you to use - All the other links pointing to the same product should be ignored".

If/when you consider that the only difference between the page *content* between two different URL's will be the content of the breadcrumb, one needs to ask themselves whether this this is going to make much of a difference to a sites ranking for that term or not.
I suspect that it will make *some* difference, but will it be enough to make the modifications worthwhile? I can't say.

Furthermore if we expand on this, and lets say you also want want something like 'Gifts for the Wife' to rank better, so you create a category of that name (ID '88') - linking the exact same products - You now have a dilema - Is your canonical link going to be
http://www.yourdomain.com/index.php?...oducts_id=1234 (where category '45' == 'Gifts for her'). or is it going to be
http://www.yourdomain.com/index.php?...oducts_id=1234 (where category '88' == 'Gifts for the Wife').

You can't have both - So how do you choose? In this case *I* would opt for 'gifts for her' because I *assume* that is going to be a more popular search query - Assumptions aren't good though. The 'niche' market seeking 'Gifts for the Wife' could be more beneficial to overall sales than the larger market of 'Gifts for her' - which I suspect has a lot of competition.

Does this adequately answer your question, or have I confused you. If I've manged to confuse you, my advice would be to leave things as they are, and let Zen create canonical links without the cPath, because any difference in rankings is going to be negligible, and the customers are going to be far more interested in the product rather than the category that you choose to drive them too.

Cheers
RodG

[lruskauff]

Why do all the URLs look the same?

[RodG]

Why do all the URLs look the same?

'Cos the forum software has decided to shorten them, and I was too late to make the edits to correct the problem. <ggrrrrr>

Tip: Hover over the links whilst viewing the bottom bar of your web browser. The full URL is displayed (at least in Chrome).

Cheers
RodG

[shags38]

If ZenCart didn't use canonical links, Google would treat them as duplicate pages. You will effectively be competing with yourself for rankings.



I've already said this in another thread, but this is bad news waiting to happen. Spaces should NOT be used for category or filenames. Replace them with a hyphen or underscore (-_).



This is asking for even bigger problems - two spaces. Use 'gifts_for_her' instead.



Uhuh.



Google will index what it finds, where it finds them, so without the use of canonical links it will see the same content in multiple categories as duplicate content. Something to be avoided.



Google will see the site and any links exactly the same as a human would with a WebBrowser.



Unless *you* add rules for the blocking, then they won't be blocked from the bots.

Consider this: You have a product with the ID '1234'
The default category for this product has an ID of '45'

The URL to this product, in this category, will be something like
http://www.yourdomain.com/index.php?...oducts_id=1234

Now, lets assume you link this product to categoryID '67' - This same product will now have two URL's - the original, plus
http://www.yourdomain.com/index.php?...oducts_id=1234

Google will see these as being duplicate content (even though there will be a *minor* difference if breadcrumbs are enabled/shown).
Not enough for Google to see them as *different* pages/content.

If you allow this, one of them will be dropped from the search results. You have no say witch one will be penalised (google has no way of knowing which is the 'original' and which is the dupe.

This is where the canonical links come into play. When working (and by default, I think) - These links are created *without* the cPath (category) information - So using the product '1234' as an example, the canonical link for both of the example URL's will be identical, looking something like

http://www.yourdomain.com/index.php?...oducts_id=1234

This is the URL that will show up in the Google *results* (for any given query) - It is as though the category doesn't even exist and because Google now only 'knows' of the URL with no cPath, the product appears as being a single page with no dupes.

SO... on this basis, the ZenCart default behaviour *isn't* really what *you* want - Well, at least not what you are asking for.
If you want a search for "Gifts for Her" to show up in search results, then the text "Gifts for Her" needs to be found somewhere on the page. Having a category called 'gifts for her' will achieve this due to the breadcrumbs (as well as any meta data for the page), but this probably won't be enough for your site to outrank others with the same small mention of the phrase, especially since when Google 'views' the page without the cPath, the phrase/category name won't even appear as a breadcrumb (you can easily try/verify this yourself by editing your URL in your browser.

Now, if you *want* to help drive people to the 'gifts for her' *category* (rather than just the product) you will need to modify ZenCarts default behaviour so the canonical link it creates is the one to this particular category - IOW, it will need to look something like

http://www.yourdomain.com/index.php?...oducts_id=1234 (where category '45' == 'Gifts for her').

With this modification in place, when Google crawls the other category(s) with this same product, it will effectively 'ignore' all of the other categories in its search results and the link it will provide will be to the cPath=45 - IOW, it will help drive the *customers* to that category. The actual results of the search will remain the same.

In other words, a canonical link is telling google "Yes, I know my site contains duplicate content - but this (the canonical link) is the one I prefer you to use - All the other links pointing to the same product should be ignored".

If/when you consider that the only difference between the page *content* between two different URL's will be the content of the breadcrumb, one needs to ask themselves whether this this is going to make much of a difference to a sites ranking for that term or not.
I suspect that it will make *some* difference, but will it be enough to make the modifications worthwhile? I can't say.

Furthermore if we expand on this, and lets say you also want want something like 'Gifts for the Wife' to rank better, so you create a category of that name (ID '88') - linking the exact same products - You now have a dilema - Is your canonical link going to be
http://www.yourdomain.com/index.php?...oducts_id=1234 (where category '45' == 'Gifts for her'). or is it going to be
http://www.yourdomain.com/index.php?...oducts_id=1234 (where category '88' == 'Gifts for the Wife').

You can't have both - So how do you choose? In this case *I* would opt for 'gifts for her' because I *assume* that is going to be a more popular search query - Assumptions aren't good though. The 'niche' market seeking 'Gifts for the Wife' could be more beneficial to overall sales than the larger market of 'Gifts for her' - which I suspect has a lot of competition.

Does this adequately answer your question, or have I confused you. If I've manged to confuse you, my advice would be to leave things as they are, and let Zen create canonical links without the cPath, because any difference in rankings is going to be negligible, and the customers are going to be far more interested in the product rather than the category that you choose to drive them too.

Cheers
RodG

Rod - many, many thanks for such a great detailed response - really good stuff. (for reference this a website in question .. www.harmonyball.net.au)

I got most of it (I think) ok let's try this (I use SEO friendly URL's) - these two urls point to the same product on my site , two different categories, one has a much longer tail than the other but both end in the meta data 'title' of the product and a page reference (1222) - I assume it is this meta data inclusive of page number that tells Google that it is looking at the same page in both cases, albeit the canonical links tell Google 'hey this guy is only trying to attract visitors to the same product via a different menu title, no problem, he is not trying to duplicate content' ... right?
http://www.harmonyball.net.au/harmon...rl-p-1222.html
http://www.harmonyball.net.au/births...rl-p-1222.html

Altering content too much could be problematic as you pointed out ... so what about this approach ... maybe to use an EZ page(s) with deadset specific content related to 'gifts_for_her' including meta data and then link to that page with the appropriate anchors, = nearly 300 product pages linking to that page (plus external links) - if that page is constructed correctly it may rank for that search term which may bring the extra visitors in, in essence it could act like a site within a site. I do have some EZ pages ranking page #1 / #2 from this site in the search term 'Harmony Ball' ... so it may work ... your thoughts?

It is just that the market for this type of jewellery is bigger than the search 'harmony ball' (and similar) for which I rank #1 AU and #1 dot com (after eBay, Amazon and Etsy in dot com, so technically #4) - women and jewellery, bees to honey - just gotta attract more bees from different flight paths :)

Again many thanks for the time, effort and expertise you put into your response - you are a true asset to Zen Cart.

Mike

[RodG]

I got most of it (I think) ok let's try this (I use SEO friendly URL's) -

You have my sympathy.

these two urls point to the same product on my site , two different categories,

Unless using canonical links, this still equals duplicate content.

one has a much longer tail than the other

I don't recall coming across this terminology before. I'm guessing it has something to do this the length of the URL (or more specically, the portion that follows the 1st /

but both end in the meta data 'title' of the product and a page reference (1222) -

I won't go into details, but this could actually have some negative consequences if the Google algorithms are unable to correlate the meta-data with the page contents.

I assume it is this meta data inclusive of page number

This can also turn and bite. Page numbers aren't consistent for any given product. If you add a product that moves the items down the list, and item that was on the bottom of page#1 is now at the top of page#2. Google now has outdated metadata for that product.
What if the the 'sort order' gets changed? A product that *was* on page1 could now be on page#3

By default, the Zencart canonical links do not include page numbers. They don't have any real meaning as far as Google is concerned. They aren't even offer any benefit to the customers either.

that tells Google that it is looking at the same page in both cases,

No, not really - Although the metadata has a specific purpose, and Google may use this data in *conjunction* with the page *content* (and woe betide any site that provides conflicting data between these two) it uses some very sophisticated algorithms to determine whether the *content* is a duplicate or not, and it doesn't determine this solely on the content it finds on *your* site - It also compares the page *content* with every other site it has in its database.

The URL is ignored/insignificant. Duplicate content is duplicate content, no matter where it found.

albeit the canonical links tell Google 'hey this guy is only trying to attract visitors to the same product via a different menu title, no problem, he is not trying to duplicate content' ... right?

Close enough.

http://www.harmonyball.net.au/harmon...rl-p-1222.html

http://www.harmonyball.net.au/birthstone-gemstone-harmony-ball-c-52/birthstone-harmony-ball-by-month-c-52_54/june-birthstone-harmony-balls-c-52_54_61/harmony-ball-necklace-sterling-silver-with-freshwater-pearl-p-1222.html

With no canonical link, these pages will be considered duplicate.

You need to be FAR MORE CONCERNED about the canonical links provided to Google than the URL's. Perhaps another example will help:

Here is a link to a a product (Ankle length Leggings) to a linked product in a clients store. It is in the 'Categories -> Bottoms -> All Bottoms' category (for this example)
h ttps://w ww.plussizedclothing.com.au/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=267_15_105&products_id=3472

Note the URL - It contains the cPath information.

Now view the page source for the canonical link, and you find that it is
h ttps://w ww.plussizedclothing.com.au/index.php?main_page=product_info&amp;products_id=3472

Note: No Cpath.

Now lets search for this product on Google: "dark grey cotton blend stretch leggings" (OK, so this search query is pretty specific, but for me, it shows this clients product is the #1 result.

Click on the link to load the page, now take a look at your browser menu to see where you landed. You'll find yourself looking at
h ttp://w ww.plussizedclothing.com.au/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=3472

Yes, that's right - Google is using and providing the canonical link, and *only* the canonical link. The other links to the same product simply don't exist as far as Google is concerned.

Lets use the two "SEO Friendly" URL's that you provided. (a severe misnomer. 'Human Friendly' is a more apt description). I've just been to both pages, and found the canonical links are:

<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.harmonyball.net.au/harmony-balls-c-14/harmony-ball-necklace-sterling-silver-with-freshwater-pearl-p-1222.html" />

and 

<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.harmonyball.net.au/harmony-balls-c-14/harmony-ball-necklace-sterling-silver-with-freshwater-pearl-p-1222.html" />

Google will effectively ignore the link to the 'june-birthstone' category. (It is actually a little bit more complicated than this because it will still find (and be aware of) this link and could still use it with some search queries).

The *important* thing though, is that Google now knows about the duplicate content and to place *preference* on the one you have specified. The key thing being that this prevents any duplication penalties. It also places whether there are any benefits to even having a 'june-birthstone' category in doubt. The best I can say here though is that 'it won't hurt'.

so what about this approach ... maybe to use an EZ page(s) with deadset specific content related to 'gifts_for_her' including meta data and then link to that page with the appropriate anchors, = nearly 300 product pages linking to that page (plus external links) - if that page is constructed correctly it may rank for that search term which may bring the extra visitors in, in essence it could act like a site within a site. I do have some EZ pages ranking page #1 / #2 from this site in the search term 'Harmony Ball' ... so it may work ... your thoughts?

This sounds like a good approach to me. It is pretty much the mantra of SEO - Content, content, and more content.

Again many thanks for the time, effort and expertise

I consider myself to be an expert in many things. SEO is not one of them. I don't have time (or interest) to keep abreast of things - so already some of what I've said or written could be outdated - and even WRONG!

I'm sure that the *real* SEO experts that are reading this thread are cringing at some of the things I've said. I'm actually waiting for them to step in and tell me how misguided I am. I wouldn't mind a bit. I'd be happy to learn from their input.

you are a true asset to Zen Cart.

Nah. Just an opinionated @ss. :)

Cheers
RodG

[shags38]

G'day Rod,

again many thanks for your detailed response - regardless of your humility I have learned something from your responses.

Lets use the two "SEO Friendly" URL's that you provided. (a severe misnomer. 'Human Friendly' is a more apt description).

yes ... 'human friendly' is a much more accurate term, much more ....

I'm sure that the *real* SEO experts that are reading this thread are cringing at some of the things I've said

I'm not sure that there is such a thing as an SEO expert - the age old adage still stands the test of time 'Content is King' (and correctly descriptive meta data relative to page content helps)

again thanks,
Mike

[RodG]

yes ... 'human friendly' is a much more accurate term, much more ....

....... And the thing is, humans don't take any notice of the URL's when looking at the search results. Google will even truncate them once they exceed a relative small length, which leads me to ask "What's the point"?

Surely the aim here is to make them SEO Friendly, and if Google prefers short, then surely

h ttp://w ww.harmonyball.net.au/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=52_54 is going to be better than...

h ttp://w ww.harmonyball.net.au/birthstone-gemstone-harmony-ball-c-52/birthstone-harmony-ball-by-month-c-52_54/june-birthstone-harmony-balls-c-52_54_61/harmony-ball-necklace-sterling-silver-with-freshwater-pearl-p-1222.html

:-) :-) :-)

Note: I don't wish to get into yet another discussion over this - It is a huge topic of contention.

I'm not sure that there is such a thing as an SEO expert -

LOL, I would tend to agree with you - Sorting out the real experts from those that say they are can be costly thing.

There *are* a couple of folk around here that I do consider *real* experts though.

the age old adage still stands the test of time 'Content is King' (and correctly descriptive meta data relative to page content helps)

Agreed, but I trust that you are aware that Google no longer uses meta-keywords as a ranking factor, and I've read in numerous places that Bing will actually penalize sites that still use them. Meta descriptions are still valid, but with these you do need to use an actual description that makes sense in both English, and be relevant to page content. - not just a lot of 'relevant' words strung together. (as I've seen a lot of sites doing).

Oh... gotta rush out.

Cheers
RodG