Your article appears to be dated 15 July 1941. When I read it, it is clearly written MUCH more recently. But you would avoid confusng the causal reader (and most readers arriving by google are prety casual) if you did not insert that cdate in the heading of the article precisely where everyone else (well, almost veryone else) expects to find the dat of the article. And ... please. Success Charles
Your article appears to be dated 15 July 1941. When I read it, it is clearly written MUCH more recently. But you would avoid confusng the causal reader (and most readers arriving by google are prety casual) if you did not insert that cdate in the heading of the article precisely where everyone else (well, almost veryone else) expects to find the dat of the article. And ... please. Success Charles