Most Pop. Articles

Article Writing & Marketing Insights

Most Pop. Articles

Rate This Post: 1 Stars 2 Stars 3 Stars 4 Stars 5 Stars

Recently we made a change at the bottom of each article where we normally listed about 30 of the most recent articles from the same category. Now, we list about half that and below the most recent are the most popular articles by category.

Located near the bottom of each article:

Some folks have said, “well, that’s brilliant, but really is tainted or skewed to give favor to the oldest articles that have been around longer.

True true.

So my question to you: How long of time should we give articles to properly expose which articles are the most popular in each category without giving unfair weight to the articles that have been around the longest?

Posted by Christopher M. Knight on January 31, 2006 at 9:31 am

Views 970 |

5 Comments »

Frank writes:

Chris, Can you weight the most popular in the last 90 Days with the old articles from 12 months past? This might give a blend of the old and new articles.

Comment provided January 31, 2006 at 10:34 am

George writes:

I would suggest in the last month i.e. The number of hits within that calender month; then both old and new articles would have the same chance of ranking if just a months figures where used.

Comment provided January 31, 2006 at 11:39 am

Linda Meckler writes:

I think, that if an article is good and filled with good information what difference does it make how old it is. Linda Meckler

Comment provided January 31, 2006 at 12:25 pm

Mark writes:

I have to agree with Linda. An article should be able to find it’s own way to the top of the ratings, regardless of age.

Comment provided January 31, 2006 at 5:42 pm

Sandra writes:

This is a great feature. Another way that authors can see who’s publishing articles is to use Google Alerts. Set up an alert for your domain name and you’ll be notified when someone links to your site. (This includes instances of the url in the resource box of a syndicated article.)

Comment provided February 2, 2006 at 2:43 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.