Duplicate and thin page detector

How to use it

1. 1Enter the address you want to checkType or paste it into the field marked "Address to check", including the https:// at the front. Start at the home page. Duplication is only visible across pages, so this needs a crawl.
2. 2Press Check and wait a few secondsThe request runs from our server rather than from your browser, so your cache, your extensions and your login session cannot affect the answer. That is the point of it: you are seeing what an anonymous visitor sees.
3. 3Set how much of the site to visitMax pages and max depth bound the crawl, and the sitemap toggle decides whether we seed from sitemap.xml as well as from links. Start small — fifty pages tells you most of what a thousand will, and it is somebody else's server.
4. 4Read why it stopped before you read the numbersA crawl that hit your page cap has not seen the site, and every count below is "out of what we visited" rather than "out of your site". The result says which of the two happened, because reporting our own limit as your site's problem is a crawler's oldest failure mode.
5. 5Look at duplicate titles and descriptionsPages sharing a title are competing with each other for the same query. This is usually a template writing the same line everywhere rather than anybody's decision.
6. 6Read the thin-content list as a comparison, not a scorePages are compared against their own site's median length. There is deliberately no minimum word count anywhere in this tool: a printed threshold teaches people to pad, and padding helps nobody.
7. 7Note the pages that were excludedA page declaring a canonical elsewhere is counted and excluded rather than reported — declaring one is the fix, not the fault. The count is shown so a clean report is not misread as "no duplication".
8. 8Share or keep the result within 24 hoursThe result has its own link you can send to whoever needs to act on it. It is deleted 24 hours after the check ran, so save anything you need to keep — and re-run the check after a change rather than trusting an old link.

About this tool

Two problems that look different and are usually the same problem: pages a search engine cannot tell apart, and pages with almost nothing on them. This crawls your site, groups the pages that share a title, meta description or main heading, and shows you the pages carrying far less text than the rest of the site.

Both questions need the whole site in view. No single-page check can tell you that another page says the same thing, and no page can tell you whether it is short compared with its neighbours.

Understanding the result

A shared title is the serious one. Two pages with the same title compete for the same searches, and an engine picks one and suppresses the other — so your site is choosing which of its own pages loses. A shared meta description costs you the snippet, not the ranking.

A shared H1 with distinct titles usually means a template heading nobody filled in. It is invisible to a title-only comparison, which is why it is checked separately.

Pages that already name a different page as canonical are left out of the comparison and counted separately. Declaring a canonical is the correct way to handle a deliberate copy — a print view, a paginated variant — so reporting it would be telling you to undo the fix.

The word counts are compared against your site's own median and nothing else. A page well below that line is worth a look if it is meant to rank; it is not a defect, and it is not a score.

Example

https://example.com/ · at most 50 pages

Compared 43 pages

critical  6 pages share a title — 2 groups
            "Products | Example" × 4
            "Blog | Example" × 2
warning  11 pages share a meta description
info      3 pages carry under 44 words (site median: 126)

2 pages excluded — they already declare a canonical elsewhere

Limitations

• This does not compare the text of your pages. It compares what they declare — title, meta description and first H1 — by exact match. Judging whether two pages actually say the same thing needs the full body of every page, and a cheap approximation of that reports confident nonsense: two product pages differing only in a model number are genuinely different pages, and a similarity percentage would call them copies.
• There is no minimum word count here and there never will be. No such minimum exists, and a tool that prints one teaches people to pad pages instead of improving them. A category listing, a contact page and a glossary entry are all legitimately short.
• A page missing a title or description entirely is not reported as a duplicate of another page missing one. That is a real problem and the full-site crawler reports it — folding the two together would describe every half-finished site as heavily duplicated.
• Word counts come from the text in the HTML as delivered, without running JavaScript, and pages whose body exceeded our download limit are left out of the counts entirely rather than being called short on incomplete evidence.
• Two pages can only be found to share a title if both were crawled. A partial crawl can miss duplicates; it cannot invent them.

Questions