I just put something like "this article (c) www.thissite.com" when I write my own articles. I think that visitors knowing the content belongs exclusively to your site, not just something written by an author on the subject and re-distributed on your site, adds credibility to your site. If they want additional future articles exclusive to your site, they will have to add your site to their favorites or perform another action. I hear that user behavior is becoming more and more a factor in the Internet search/advertising industry so best to keep posting new content that you make clear is exclusive to your website.

Aren't supposed to be all articles on your site exclusive for your site? I don't think I have any article on any of my sites that wasn't written by me or one of my co-workers....

Is it so widely spread to use other people's articles? How? Why?

I have a number of articles on my site that are not written by me--in most cases they were written by someone I know for one-time print publication, and have been contributed to my site in exchange for a link.

I always put the author's name at the top of the article, somewhat like it's done in a magazine, whether the author is me or someone else.

Jinxboy, easy, just go buy articles related to your topic from writers who know what they are talking about. There are reasons besides just being lazy that publishers purchase articles. If your site leads visitors to be interested in side topics that you know little about, you may want to hire someone more knowledgeable in that particular field to write the article in order to provide the information to vistors online(as opposed to numerous daily emails containing the same question that you don't know how to answer).

Is it prefereable to name the author? Does it add credibility?

It does if I write them. I have no idea if it does if you write them, but if you are asking the question, it probably doesn't matter one way or another.

If it's the front page article I will put the name on it, as sometimes it's a guest author. But for the rest of the site I will use the generic copyright line. I think that overall putting the author's name is a good idea though.

Just so you know, you can't allocate copyright to a Web site. Copyright has to be assigned to a 'natural person' or 'legal entity' (eg Business, Registered Charity etc). Wiki both these terms for more info. Unless your legal entity is called www.mydomain.com, you can't say Copyright www.mydomain.com. It's either John Smith (man he gets around) or John Smith Inc/LLC/Pty Ltd etc Copyrighting to a Web site is just like trying to copyright it to a telephone number or mailing address.

Solution
Write about the article of the other site,

this article information part interesting

Written by you, source: foo.com

I might give some thought to copyright related issues. Is "the site" really the author? Are you daying "the site is you"? Might be, as a d/b/a (doing business as) but might not be.

If there is a business entity - a corporation - is there an assignment of rights agreement? Might that be a good idea?

I'd roll this question around in the context of DMCA's, notice of copyright claim, etc. It might behoove you to say it the way it really is. If not you might have a lot of explaining to do some day. :o/

If I am creating an Adsense site with articles...

What exactly is an "Adsense site?"

From the AdSense Program Policies:

No Google ad may be placed on pages published specifically for the purpose of showing ads, whether or not the page content is relevant.

Sorry guys - I just had to ... :)

FarmBoy

Just so you know, you can't allocate copyright to a Web site. Copyright has to be assigned to a 'natural person' or 'legal entity' (eg Business, Registered Charity etc)...

If you're in the U.S., this is an easy process. You just go to your local county clerk's office and complete a ficticious business name form.

FarmBoy

'Adsense site' was a poor choice of words. A 'site containing adsense advertising' would be better.

I guess if I am the sole writer is makes little sense to put my name on the byline.

If you name the author it adds credibility

If the author is well known it adds more credibility

If you include the author's address it adds even more credibility

If you include the author's phone number it adds even more credibility

If you include the author's email address it adds even more credibility

The more specific details the more credibility

I'm the sole writer on my main site, but my name (with a link to my personal site) is on every book review.

If its written by you and you are going to write tons of articles, its silly to put your name everypage. If u have an article site with content from you and others, then may be there is a reason to put the Author tag. Else I dont see a specific reason to slap your name on every article.

Gabby.. add to ur list..
-Put a photo to it, and that adds more credibility..

International authors law say:

- each author can (but he doesn't need) to sign his creation
- if the author sell its creation, he sells the copyright in common, too

My website is famous of unique, machless content. I dont want to babble out my content vendors - it is my content, my mark, my business, my vendors :)

Let's not forget something else. Your name on the article means anyone Googling it will find it 9unless you are the prolific John Smith I mentioned). That is *anyone*, employers, employess, friends, enemies, lovers, ex-lovers, potential lovers, people who work on memberships for bars/clubs, customs...