This may sound strange, but I have a new article ready now. But since it's almost the end of the year, I think it may be better to wait and submit any new articles after Jan 1 2006, since all my articles have the year copyright in them by my name, ie; Solon Bluegill (c)2005 An article submitted say in Nov, copyright 2005, would not get hardly any traffic or reads after Jan 1 2006, due to its copyright date, but an article with a copyright date of 2006, would do good all 12 months of 2006. What do you think, wait and submit articles Jan 1, 2006
Why wouldn't people read it in 2006 if it said copyright 2005, would it be out of date? Why don't you just put on it copyright 2005, 2006
I know I don't use material on any of my sites that is a year old etc, because a lot of info outdates so fast. So probably a lot of other folks don't go back much either, and stick with fresh material.
It seems to me that the article will be older if you wait to submit it until 2006. It can't be fresher than it is now?! I don't know about others but I usually don't judge the age of the material on the copyright date. If the content is fresh to me I consider it good. I also think most people know that an article could have been submitted at the end of the last year when reading it at the beginning of next year. I would submit it and not wait until someone else submit something similar.
I only look at article dating when the content is subject to freshness. For examples: "How to clean your fish tank" - don't care about dating. Nothing is likely to be time sensitive. "How to rank higher in search engines" - care about dating. The SE industry changes rapidly so the fresher the article, the better. "Windows 95 Tips" - The main subject is out of date. It does not matter when it was written.
er the copyright date has nothing to do with the number of visitors that a site gets!!!!! And it's copyrighted for some where around 60 or 75 years so you don't have to edit it for a LONG time! Rumor has it that a full moon decreases the number of internet visitors by 20%.
Nintendo - A lot of folks have websites that need or want current up to date content. I for one would not use any articles or material dated prior to 2005 on my sites, so I am sure a lot of others are the same. Maybe you don't need current material I do.
Use SSI to keep the date updated through out the site with out having to update more than one file each year!
To add my 2 cents to this discussion, I've had quite a few article orders in the past month that have fallen along these same lines..webmasters are purchasing content NOW, to release later with their own copyright. I'm not sure if I totally agree with their way of thinking, but, as the saying goes..the customer is always right
Nintendo - I think you are misunderstanding what I even am talking about, not a websites copyright year. I mean an article published to an article site. I am saying that I would not use any articles with a copyright older than the current year because the info in the article could be outdated based on it's subject matter, espicaly world news, current events, stock and bond info, etc. For my sites I use current contents only, the info has to be at least correct. And many articles I read that are copyright 2004 or later are worthless for my needs, I was saying that a lot of other folks probably need or only use articles that are copyrighted currently also. In fact I don't even read an article that I see is copyright or dated older than 11 months. You talk about the moon etc shows me the mentality you have
Spend some time down in the Off Topic boards, or make searches for viagra or virgins there and you'll quickly see how messed up I am!!!!! They don't kall me da King of da Wackos 4 nothing!!!
If your content is time sensitive, you should wait until 1-1-06. On that date, update if needed and release. If it is just an article on how to catch a fish - release now. You can write a rehash in the first quarter of next year.
One could release the material now or next month, while it is at its freshest, with a copyright of 2006. This is standard practice in offline publication--just check your newsstands during the months of Nov. and Dec. You'll see a lot of monthly publications with 2006 dates. Alternatively, you can do a 2005-2006 copyright date.
I read a lot, but don't post much. I consider myself a beginner. However, I see something fundamentally illogical about tossing out anything created in October 2005 in January of 2006 based solely on the fact that the article is 3 monthes old. In my brain, I can quickly infer that an article written in 2004 is 11-23 monthes old give or take. There seams to be a direct contradiction between your hardcore belief in up to date, brand new articles and your willingness to let an article sit out and rot for 3 monthes. If being up to date was that big of deal, you would have already posted it. Then you would write another article in January. Something just doesn't compute. Brandon