3 ms·
<subrant>What's even worse, and equally common, is no date on the article or if there is a date it's hidden away somewhere near the bottom of the content. These
by cutler 6y ago
<subrant>What's even worse, and equally common, is no date on the article or if there is a date it's hidden away somewhere near the bottom of the content. These things are just so basic. I think we need to resurrect Jakob Nielson and get him on the speaker circuit again.</subrant>
- gregschlom 6y agoThe date is right above the title in this case.
- cutler 6y agoI was generalising about what is common in the subrant so maybe it should have read "when there is no date on the article".
- gary_0 6y agoOn a related note, I've noticed lately that Google has been giving me old results that show up as having recent dates, even though there's no date anywhere on the page (or it was grabbed from a random Disqus comment), and the content is clearly outdated (and often blogspam). I wonder if DuckDuckGo is any better...