John Mueller from Google addressed a query regarding a website that was believed to have been removed from search results due to a cross-domain canonical content problem.
Cross-Domain Standard
The Redditor mentioned canonical content, which seems to indicate a possible reference to a cross-domain canonical.
A cross-domain canonical meta tag informs search engines that the content on one website is equivalent to the content on another website. It serves as a multi-website variation of the standard canonical meta tag, which deals with URLs within the same site. Google views both meta tags as a significant suggestion but may not necessarily follow them.
The cross-domain canonical is used to show that a website has been moved from one domain to another when a 301 redirect was not feasible for some reason, although this situation is now uncommon.
Cross-domain canonicals were utilized to show that the primary version of a shared content page was located on a different URL.
Google’s advice on cross-domain canonicals for syndicated content was updated to suggest using a meta no-index HTML element as the preferred approach.
The instructions regarding syndicated content have been updated to state:
When you distribute your articles to other news or network sites, they can include a robots meta tag on your content.
The text states:
This tag prevents Google News from including the syndicated copies of your content in its index.
To limit syndicated content from appearing on Google News and Google Search, external websites can use this robots meta tag on their articles.
The text says:
This tag prevents Google’s primary user-agent, Googlebot, from indexing your content.
At this stage, it is unnecessary to employ a cross-domain canonical tag since there are more effective methods such as 3xx redirects and the meta noindex directive that ensure Google complies with the desired action.
A report found that a cross-domain canonical led to de-indexing.
A Reddit user found out that their website had been removed from search engine indexes. Upon further examination, they realized that a casino website was being treated as the main version of their site.
The Redditor did not explain how they verified it as their own website, as it involves placing a canonical meta tag on their site linking to the casino site.
They provided the website address for the casino, which I have altered to example.com.
They depicted it in this manner:
Our pages are being increasingly de-indexed by Google due to an unusual domain. The pages focus on companies and suppliers, but Google is recognizing a casino betting page as the canonical one.
Our pages and this page have no content similarities whatsoever.
When I analyze www.example.com, I can’t find any page that is relevant to our content.
Does anyone have any idea what this is about and how to resolve it?
Why the website appeared to be canonicalized
Another Reddit user (No_Wrap_9584) shared that they experienced a comparable issue. They found that their website displayed a server error message, as did other websites, which Google grouped together. This issue was eventually resolved on its own after a few weeks.
User No_Wrap_9584 elaborated:
When the third-party canonical URL is searched on Google Search, it shows up in the index with the title:
An application error has happened on the client side (check the browser console for further details).
This is a standard error message in JavaScript that is sometimes shown on our website when there are temporary issues with loading the application.
This leads us to believe that Googlebot may have previously indexed an error or fallback response instead of actual page content, resulting in multiple URLs with the same error being treated as duplicates. This could clarify the selection of cross-domain canonicals and the subsequent de-indexing, despite everything appearing to be in good condition now.
Google reacts to the report of removing from the index.
John Mueller from Google agreed with the Redditor’s suggestion and advised utilizing the Search Console’s live URL checker to assess how Google is displaying the webpage.
Mueller released a follow-up response including further clarification and recommendations.
In the end, I believe this is not significant, even though it may be perplexing. The possible results are essentially:
Your page is considered canonical, but it is indexed with the server message, meaning that your page does not appear in search results for regular content.
Your page is considered a soft-404, which means it does not appear in search results for standard content.
Your page is not appearing in search results because it is not the canonical page.
It is better to identify and address errors internally before launching the website. Conducting automated tests prior to the site going live can help prevent such issues.
Whenever I encounter an issue, I instruct the code-agent to create a new test for it. Running these tests may take a few minutes, but they provide additional assurance that the website will function properly once it goes live. A similar approach can involve setting up site monitoring either manually or using a third-party tool. By regularly checking the most important pages for issues, such as on an hourly basis, you can address and resolve them proactively to prevent them from becoming significant problems that search engines may detect.
Are Cross-Domain Canonical De-Indexings Genuine?
For a cross-domain canonical to be effective, the site owner’s domain must include the cross-domain canonical pointing to a different website for the signals to be transferred. If this is the case, it might indicate a hacking incident. If this is not the case, then it is not a situation of cross-domain canonical de-indexing.
A coincidence in SEO occurs when two events happen separately but seem to be related. For instance, some users notice a quick impact after using link disavowals, even though it typically takes months to see results in search rankings.
Sometimes people attribute their illness to having eaten something disagreeable, when in fact it could be due to coming into contact with a contaminated shopping cart. Similarly, in the world of SEO, the presence of multiple pages on a website with related content is often perceived as a problem called “keyword cannibalization.”
Sometimes events may seem connected by cause and effect when they are not truly related. In this case, the Redditor may have incorrectly associated something they observed as the cause. Conducting a backlink search might have revealed numerous low-quality links, leading to the mistaken belief that the links were the cause. However, this is merely speculation and not a definitive instance of cause and effect.
Shutterstock/vittaya pinpan is the source of the featured image.