Undoubtably the best articles sites?

[safetynut]

To all you experts out there.

What are the best article sites to post unique articles. There are so many to choose from so i'm wondering which ones are considered the best to target, and how often one should post an article.

Thanks in advance.

 

[eventdomain]

What are the best article sites to post unique articles

Article databases/indexes got hit big-time, so its not worth bothering about anymore. Such 'resource' sites, areas and sections that ARE the best, great etc won't be open to the likes of non-resource sites anyway.

We are talking about actual resource/portals here and why they are created in the first place. Most are built to gather info of a certain type, so if you don't fit their criteria, then you won't be of interest to them - get it.... Most forum members are self-employed services eg: Copywriters, SEO's - so nothing related to the huge portals available, and that's not even taking into consideration that the content is even good or not, that would tempt such portals anyway.

If I owned a travel portal, why the hell would it want some two-bit car-wash service even speaking on the subject of travel? it wont be an authority opinion or facts - its just spam. No question that I'd see the car washes own link, thus work out its only spam - so ofcourse I won't publish, no matter how good the article - the article doesnt serve me as its not my link attached to the article.

If you must write articles, then put them on your own website.

 

[makeusvisible]

If you can find good quality RELEVANT and non-spam websites, who are willi ng to publish your articles, then by all means go with those. A fair benchmark of quality is to ask if the readers of the article on the target site might find it useful, and might click the links to visit your site.

As the poster above mentioned, dont neglect your own blog in line with publishing quality content on other sites.

 

[webgeek]

Yeah, switching from article directories to guest posts on relevant blogs/sites, along with your own, is important.

If you're able to output a high enough volume, publish a couple of 1000+ word articles per week on your own site, then another 1 or 2 articles on external sites.

Content may be king, but getting your remarkable articles in front of the target audience is a great way to build authority and gain traffic, without waiting months for Google to rank you highly in search.

 

[fisicx]

What are the best article sites to post unique articles. There are so many to choose from so i'm wondering which ones are considered the best to target, and how often one should post an article.

Put them on your own site. You will them get all the traffic, all the link juice, all the leads.

The difficult bit is creating articles that google wants to index and rank well.

So spend the next week reading the stuff on http://www.copyblogger.com/. Ignore the promo for scribe, the good stuff is in the tutorials.

 

[ITsoldUK]

To all you experts out there.

What are the best article sites to post unique articles. There are so many to choose from so i'm wondering which ones are considered the best to target, and how often one should post an article.

Thanks in advance.

Very easy one to answer this one.

My website is the best place for me to post my unique articles.

I benefit and so do my visitors.

HTH

Regards
Daren

 

[InternetMarketingPlatinum]

I'd agree with most of what's already been said. It's better to place articles on your own site and a select number of guest blogs posts should be created on a regular basis...the number should depend upon budget and time. Quality of quantity. There are other ways to market online - banner ads on niche sites, email marketing...the list goes on. Integrate and test opportunities.

 

[eventdomain]

If you're able to output a high enough volume, publish a couple of 1000+ word articles per week on your own site, then another 1 or 2 articles on external sites.

So 4 articles per week is 4 @ 52 weeks = 208

Only 208 articles per year? hardly high volume, its naff all in content terms and a waste of time. The fact that article databases are useless just confirms this doesn't work.

Rather than articles - why not invent a resource in a subject area - now THAT would be useful!! Drives traffic in the thousands - that is guaranteed...

 

[OldWelshGuy]

Ed I think you are getting hung up on the term 'article' it is a much maligned term, and really should be referred to as 'content'. I completely agree with what you say, but it is what others already said i.e. add the content to your own site

Also I agree with what you say about article directories having been massacred, but some good content sites work. there are many decent sites out there.

 

[eventdomain]

Ed I think you are getting hung up on the term 'article'

Nope - its others who get 'hung up' as if writing an article is the greatest thing on earth. I just dont touch articles in volume anymore as its very boring and pointless as a traffic driver or a link-profile builder.

Any content is best on your own website - why give it to someone else its just theres better ways to go about the 'content site' idea, that's all. The examples of greatness is available to all, so its a wonder why so many waste precious time on time wasting methods when they could do much better using the right kind of website.

Why they don't? probably cost of the overall project - but my point is once its built, it will pay back for years to come with free traffic.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

After reading that I am not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing

I was just saying that the term 'article' is another name for content, be it on your own site, or guest blogged on another site, it is all content. And the best by far is build content that people will want to link to. So on your site, then promote it so people link to it.

 

[eventdomain]

I was just saying that the term 'article' is another name for content,

I know what your saying - but articles are such a bad form of content, (even when in bulk) and far more interesting types of content can be used instead that people WILL read and search.

Distributing articles is another bad/overused idea, - its just screams desperate! these folk will never write enough to get the results, which is traffic, wherever it derives from, so is a waste of time. I'd suggest 2000 articles would be required to get some fairly good traffic-flow - but now your entering the resource site sector, and have another problem on your hands in that the users now expect more articles, so now have to kind of honour that out of fear of losing the visitors that's built up - a crazy thing to put on yourself, and no means or structure to maintain it.

Also I can't see 'normal folk' having the drive to write 2k of articles - to do so won't be in their nature, no guts and not driven enough - yet their very quick to lay down opinion or judge that which they have zero experience of, over say professional publishers.

To prove my point, I used to own a full article database, it had over 500 articles on it, and was promoted on a 150k traffic website. But 500 articles isnt much (only 500 pages) but it did attract spam like a magnet as it accepted free articles, and after monitoring for 12 months, the article side was removed. Moral is, if you use a method known as a spam tool, then that's what you'll get. Maybe there was some quality articles submitted, probably - but the spam always outweighs this by 1000/1 - that you can be assured of.

So actual traffic wasn't the problem - the article content idea was the error.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

I know what your saying - but articles are such a bad form of content, (even when in bulk) and far more interesting types of content can be used instead that people WILL read and search.

Ed I stopped reading at that point because you are just not listening to what I said., I say that the term 'article' is vague and mis-used it simply means 'content' you then tell me you know what I am saying but that there are better ways than articles.

An Article put simply means a piece of written content. is that simple enough?

What you are saying is " but content are such a bad form of content, (even when in bulk) and far more interesting types of content can be used instead that people WILL read and search. "

You seem to be arguaing about something that doesn't require debate, as it is the same thing, it is like arguing that a dog is ok but a dog is better.