Internal links favor a different URL than the canonical. The useful response is a targeted correction with an observable acceptance check. That keeps the repair tied to the problem instead of turning it into an open-ended redesign.
Find the likely cause
Navigation and template rules were maintained separately.
Treat this as an explanation to verify against the actual work. Look at the input, the relevant decision, and the final result together. If the evidence does not support this diagnosis, investigate the mismatch before applying a convenient but unrelated fix.
Make the targeted correction
Align ordinary links with the intended preferred version where appropriate.
Canonical handling should express a consistent preferred version while preserving a useful experience for visitors.
Check that the repair worked
Crawl representative paths and compare their destinations.
Repeat the check on the final version that the reader or customer will encounter. An approved draft, a preview, and a published result can differ; the acceptance decision should concern the version people actually use.
Prevent the next related failure
A separate issue to watch for is this: every product variant canonicalizes to a broad category. Review whether variants are equivalent before choosing preferred URLs.
Monitor the useful outcome
Track conflicting canonical declarations and whether important pages remain discoverable and usable.
Keep a short record of the original symptom, the evidence behind the diagnosis, and the result of the acceptance check. That record makes the solution reusable when the same condition appears again, without assuming that every superficially similar problem has the same cause.
Official reference for the platform or standard discussed: Google Search Central: canonical URLs.