Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thanks, Ryan. I'll get to work on the issues you mentioned.

I do have one question for you - grammarly.com/proofreading (significantly fewer links, identical codebase) is now back on the index. If the issue was too many scripts or HTML errors, wouldn't both pages still be de-indexed?

The saga continues...

According to WMT, there are no issues with grammarly.com The page is fetched and rendered correctly.

Google! Y u no index? Any ideas?

Excellent question, Lynn. Thank you for chiming in here. There's a user agent based javascript redirect that keeps Chrome visitors on grammarly.com (Chrome browser extension) and sends other browsers to grammarly.com/1 (Web app that works on all browsers).

UPDATE: According to WMT Fetch+Render, the Googlebot redirection issue has been fixed. It is no longer being redirected anywhere and returning a 200 OK for grammarly.com.

Kelly, if that was causing the problem, how long should I hold my breath for re-indexing after re-submitting the homepage?

Hi Alex, Thank you for your response. The pages didn't suffer in ranking, they were completely removed from the index. Based on that, do you still think it could be a keyword issue?

That's actually a great point. I suppose Google could have been holding on to a pre-redesign cached version of the pages.

There has been a 50-100% increase in page download times as well as some weird 5x spikes for crawled pages. I know there could probably be a million different reasons, but do any of them stick out at you as being potential sources of the problem?

Thanks, Ryan. Improving our code-to-text ratio is on our roadmap, but could that really be the issue here? The pages were all fully indexed without problems for a full month after our redesign, and we haven't added any scripts. Was there an algorithm update on Monday that could explain the sudden de-indexing?

Our homepage, as well as several similar landing pages, have vanished from the index. Could you guys review the below pages to make sure I'm not missing something really obvious?!

URLs: http://www.grammarly.com http://www.grammarly.com/plagiarism-checker

1. It's been four days, so it's not just a temporary fluctuation
2. The pages don't have a "noindex" tag on them and aren't being excluded in our robots.txt
3. There's no notification about a penalty in WMT

Clues:

1. WMT is returning an "HTTP 200 OK" for Fetch, is showing a redirect to grammarly.com/1 (alternate version of homepage, contains rel=canonical back to homepage) for Fetch+Render. Could this be causing a circular redirect?

2. Some pages on our domain are ranking fine, e.g. https://www.google.com/search?q=grammarly+answers

3. A month ago, we redesigned the pages in question. The new versions are pretty script-heavy, as you can see.

4. We don't have a sitemap set up yet.

Any ideas? Thanks in advance, friends!

Hey everyone,

We have a free browser extension for Chrome and a paid web product for all other browsers. Given the differences in product and pricing (free vs. paid) I'd like visitors to see a different landing page based on their browser. Visitors using Chrome should see a landing page with content about the free browser extension, while visitors from every other browser should see a landing page with content about the paid, premium web product. I'm trying to decide between these two options:

a) 302 redirect visitors from one static HTML landing page to another if their user agent suggests they're using Chrome

b) Use javascript to make parts of the landing page dynamic and show a different CTA and different copy for visits from Chrome

Does anyone have any experience with having to make this choice? What are some things I should take into consideration for optimal "crawlability" and page-load-speed? Thanks in advance!

We own a number of foreign TLD domains for our brand. They are all 301-redirected to our main .com branded domain.

One of them is appearing in our branded search results, outranking out main .com page. To be clear, this is despite there being a 301 redirect from it to the .com page.

Any ideas on what is going on here?

Hey everyone, I have a question about the following scenario:

Page 1: Text A, Text B, Text C

Page 2 (rel=canonical to Page 1): Text A, Text B, Text C, Text D

Much of the content on page 2 is "rel=canonical"ized to page 1 to signalize duplicate content. However, Page 2 also contains some unique text not found in Page 1.

How safe is it to use the unique content from Page 2 on a new page (Page 3) if the intention is to rank Page 3?

Does that make any sense?