Jan writes:

I’ve shifted to including my name as part of the copyright… because it just seemed important to do so.

I like the continuation of the article in the ‘author box’ because it keeps the reader moving forward, then a signature copyright including my name.

That’s probably clear as mud… lol

Jan

[Reply]

abdelkader medjahdi writes:

hello,

I have just a question: what wants to say ressourse box?
and I you will see my comment of it.

Thank you

[Reply]

Christopher M. Knight writes:

Abdelkader,

I’m not sure I understand your question?

I also see that you don’t have a membership account with us.

The RESOURCE BOX is located directly below the article body and it’s designed to offer the reader additional resources for continued reading or solution fact finding…ie: Such as visiting YOUR WEBSITE.

[Reply]

abdelkader medjahdi writes:

hello,

thank you for your answer,
as I hold to thank you for your very rich informations and I regard myself as one of your students.
I learned much with you, thank you for informations that yousend to me .
Finally how then can I to have an account?
Thank you

Abdelkader

[Reply]

Jeff Herring - The Article Guy writes:

It’s always amazing to me to see the marketing materials that DON’T have the person’s name or contact info on them, so your advice is well taken.

At the same time, I’ve also seen so many people turn their resource box into their “virtual ego wall” so there needs to be a balance as well between not enough about you and waaaay too much about you.

Chris and everyone else – what have you found to be the sweet spot?

Jeff

[Reply]

Christopher M. Knight writes:

Abdelkader,

To get started, go here: http://www.EzineArticles.com/submit and create a membership account.

Friendly tip: Be sure to have your articles proofed before submission.

Jeff,

Sweet spot is that your Resource Box should be no greater than 15% of your article body size in word count and in vertical height.

[Reply]

Jan writes:

I’m finding that my sweet spot is no more than two or three lines, name at the bottom, and only one link in the RB.

It works really well to end my article with a question, and answer the question in the resource box. Wonder where I learned that?

Jan

[Reply]

Lance Winslow writes:

When someone uses a pen name, and I contact that person to do business later on and find out their real name, this to me also tells me they are not really experts or they are hiding something.

I think if you are promoting a product or service on the Internet not only should you put your name in the Resource Box, but also use your REAL NAME, if not is seems like a deceptive “Shrill” tactic and is borderline “FRAUD” and definitely BUZZ Marketing questionable tactics.

I deplore dishonesty on the web and I believe not using YOUR REAL NAME, is dishonest, whether it is in a forum, blog or online article, especially if your article is trying to sell something or get someone to come to your website to sell them something.

I have NO RESPECT for those people who put FAKE names and use deception tactics in marketing, I think you ought to be put in jail. Nothing erks me more. I am shocked that more people do not agree with me and lack the personal character and integrity to stand by their words and on the moral high-ground. It is a real statement about the person in MY OPINION>

[Reply]

Zack Lim writes:

Hi Lance Wislow,

This is the first time I post on this blog although I have been reading this blog quite frequently. When I read your post, I feel that I have to write down my view.

I agree totally with you that if we want to do a business online or offline, honesty is very important. I have a bad experience before. I feel totally cheated and there was a period of time when I do not even dare to buy anything online.

It was only until I met one guy who is very honest in his online business then I regain my faith that at least there are honest people on the internet.

I agree with the post that we should post our author name on the resource box. The best thing is to give a real name so that customer will know the real person’s name.

[Reply]

Edward Weiss writes:

It’s also a good idea to bold out the author’s name as well. I do this and it serves two purposes… It lets readers know that the article has ended and begins the resource box with my name in highlighted.

The reason I mention this at all is that I’ve seen some author’s articles where I can’t tell where the article ends and the resource box begins. :)

[Reply]

Alyssa Johnson writes:

Edward,

I think our article and resource box SHOULD flow into each other. Our article is our “give” to our readers. The resource box is our “take.” If they are completely distinct, the likelihood of them reading the resource box drops significantly. And the whole point is that we WANT them to read the resource box so they will come to our site, offer or product.

I like the idea of bolding our name to make that stand out, but I think my name should be the last line in my resource box so that people keep reading to see what else I offer besides just that article.

[Reply]

Jan writes:

Integrating your TAKE with what you GIVE is a key to bringing the reader back to your website and promoting your products/services. It helps the reader to continue, because they’re still seeking information, and you give them what they want, a link to more information (your website).

It’s a promotional tool that works, and it’s more than just effective, if you’ve done your job, your website adds even more information, and links to products you produce that provide even more information.

Jan

[Reply]

John R writes:

Candidly, I’m more interested in traffic and credibility for the site than I am as establishing my own personal credibility. So I tend to favor the continuation of the story in the resource box, and judging from my traffic that I get from those articles it seems to work better for me.

Along those lines, I had always wondered if there were some way that in addition to the metric on number of times that the publisher link has been followed if there were a way to measure the percent click through in the resource box as well. I know that would be hard to do without breaking the article’s ability to act as a link and pass Page Rank to the site, but it’s just a thought.

John R

[Reply]

Lance Winslow writes:

Dear John R,

I would like to tie this into another discussion and comment on your comment as well.

It appears that a very large percentage of the article authors here are more interested in click-thru traffic, that is why they write articles, and it is an article marketing site, that is its original purpose. Someone writing better articles can perhaps gain the perception of expert and then get more targeted traffic.

There of course is that issue of targeted traffic VS traffic. Still I find that debate interesting because if you have an article with 75,000 views and one with 300, then you will as a percentage get more sales on your website from the one with 75K article views, simple percentages and click thru rates, sure the click-thru rate maybe less than 1/2 or 1/3 but with that degree of difference – who cares. You have the traffic and a percentage of those will become buyers you see? Thus if I write a “trite” article about the “10 Most Popular Hair Style for 2007” which I did and if it gets 75,000 article views which it did, I still come out ahead no matter how you slice it.

So, you can see the incentive of thinly written, trite content does pull on one’s reality if their goal is solely to get traffic. My goals are not traffic anymore and I do not often write silly articles like that, as it was more of an experiment for me, the subject simply does not interest me, and I could care less “What Paris Hilton Eats for Breakfast in the LA Jail,” but you can bet someone who writes that article today, will rock with traffic in the future.

John R states: “.. .. .. I tend to favor the continuation of the story in the resource box, and judging from my traffic that I get from those articles it seems to work better for me.”

I absolutely agree with you and have noticed that it also improves people lifting articles and then taking your name off and stealing your work and this means you get more “pick-ups” and syndicated usage where the link is still in tact.

John R states: “I know that would be hard to do without breaking the article’s ability to act as a link and pass Page Rank to the site, but it’s just a thought.”

This is a good thought and to that point I also believe this can be done with site tracking software to see where surfers go, how long they stay on a page and where they click out too. So, this information is known and it is valuable information too, I agree.

Further, if a reader finishes an article that is of value, the average reader can finish a 300 word article in about 1 minute to 1:30 and longer articles will have more folks clicking out before they completely read the article and less likely to bother to scroll down the page, but it would take about 2-3 minutes for a 600 word article and 4 to 6 minutes for a 1,000 to 1200 word article.

Question is, are the readers interested in that much reading, as Internet Surfers are “Click Happy” group of mal-contents with the attention span of a gnat. And mind you I mean a very nice, loving insect type gnat, with hopes and dreams and an iPod as they go. So if your content gets too thick, then see ya, they are gone, if this is not your clientele you probably do not care, because they are not your target market anyway. But if they click out due to too much thick content, their click-out “Vote” would go against your quality rating. So, there is a relative truth about the Internet Surfer and their behavior and a reality of how online article marketing works. I would advise authors to do what works for them, even though some of the silly stupid articles are degrading the language, literature in general and an insult to my intelligence? Thoughts?

[Reply]