1201:"Because of the potentially humorous nature of aptronyms a number of newspapers have collected them. San Francisco Chronicle columnist Herb Caen reported irregularly on reader-submitted gems, including substitute teacher Mr. Fillin, piano teacher Patience Scales, and the Vatican's spokesman on the evils of rock 'n roll, Cardinal Rapsong." This is immediately after you said that aptronyms are something completely different. So these examples of aptronyms should be removed unless the references actually give proof of the causality.
423:
402:
21:
117:
177:
54:
528:
507:
229:
328:
208:
433:
2051:, a Canadian advertising firm – it just hit me that one of the guys who co-founded it was named Stephen Brander. Unfortunately, given there aren't any decent secondary sources covering the firm, there aren't any decent secondary sources covering the nominative determinism involved, so probably not suitable to add to the article. But leaving it here for future reference... –
318:
297:
970:
with anything. Maybe you could use clearer examples and analogies? But if there were a referenced astrologer named Star that would be an appropriate example of
Nominative Determination. If you are an admin, Johnuniq, I would strongly suggest you read the article and get a sense of what the examples were intended to indicate. Remember, this is a
1821:, are incredibly old (first recorded in 975 and 1182 respectively) and incredibly common surnames, widely given to people with no relationship to smiths or tailors. Even if we very charitably assume that a particular Smith or Taylor got their surname as late as, say, 1400 from an actual smith or tailor, the odds of actually being descended
774:, and appears to have been inserted after the former merge proposal in an attempt to justify separate articles. Actually reading them shows that they are in fact duplicate articles in every meaningful respect, including the nature of their mutually-redundant lists of notable examples, and the explanation of what the terms mean. —
538:
1849:
This comes from reference 99: Voracek, Martin; Rieder, Stephan; Stieger, Stefan; Swami, Viren (2015). "What's in a
Surname? Physique, Aptitude, and Sports Type Comparisons between Tailors and Smiths". The article has been cited once according to Google Scholar, but not in a language I can read. I can
1030:
Also the analogy is completely unclear. What does somebody's astrological sign have to do with anything? The article is about names and occupations -- not signs, there's no reason a sensible pared-down list of a couple of examples can't be included, which is what I was doing on this page, monitoring
938:
of the theory. Nominative
Determinism is never held out to be anything other than a theory in the article, and the names are merely meant to illustrate some individuals whom the theory could be said to apply to. Of course it's completely unverifiable that their name led them to their profession, but
1083:
Well, at least I am in the consensus group. I know it's a "theory" as per my use of the word in the post above yours. You appear to be currently the only person that is right. This is not my chosen subject and I had never heard of the theory, so just applying my interpretation of guidelines after a
969:
I think that is a fundamental misunderstanding of what the article is about, and what I said above. Nobody, lest of all me, has ever said that they were real and made people choose a job. It says clearly in the introduction that this is a theory. Furthermore, I have no idea what astrology has to do
954:
No. Editors should not add lists of "these are obvious examples" to articles. As I said at ANI: has a secondary source examined all the people named "Fish" and determined whether an unusual proportion of them are marine biologists? How would we feel if someone added examples to an astrology article
1045:
Unless specific people have opined that notable people have been affected by this "theory" in a reliable secondary source I do not support their names inclusion in this article. If the case above applies, then attribution to the opining person should be required. Last night I saw on a comedy show,
914:
The list of examples is highly dubious and surely based on positive reinforcement. Find someone's name with an
English meaning, get a match, proves a point. All that nominative determinism is demonstrating is coincidence, I am certain that if the name is not English in origin, it would be ignored.
731:
The articles would seem to suggest that they are different things. I had not heard of aptronyms before but they seem to primarily refer to fictional names. The other article is about an alleged or humourous theory that roles are assumed according to one's name. It is widely discussed in papers and
616:
I don't think
Crapper is the perfect example since the name for the device, and therefore the name of the act, came from the name of the inventor. I think if you research it, the word "crap" didn't come into existance until Crapper invented the water closet. (Unsigned comment from an IP address)
1825:
from someone from 600 years ago are slim at best, and if you are, that person gave you something like 1/1073741824th of your genetic code. If this argument isn't in a source, it should be deleted. If a source makes the argument but doesn't list the names "Smith" and "Taylor", the source should be
742:
The definition given here seems to be for aptronym - a name that aptly fits the character. Nominative determinism would seem rather to mean - and when and if I can find the Post-It, I'll quote the source - that the name determines, decides, informs the character. It is fiction, of course, we're
1962:
But, given a mix of biology, genetics, administrative lexicon and misunderstanding of human eugenetics confused with other species forced breeding, i.e. not informed, voluntary, consensual and intentional, this concept can indeed be an inspiration for someone who want to punish someone else, for
1809:
An alternative explanation is genetic: a person might be named Smith or Taylor because that was originally their occupation, and they would pass on their genes to their descendants, including an aptitude for activities involving strength in the case of Smith, or dexterity in the case of Taylor.
1164:
For this reason (and others) I have twice reverted the following an addition concerning Arsene Wenger and Mr Gove because one managed
Arsenal and the other was in Government. As far as I am concerned, these fails to meet the criteria of being sourced and also failed to match the basic tenet of
1185:
I have reworked the article to focus on the concept, and the theoretical framework and studies, rather than a list of examples. Of course, the concept needs examples to be well understood, and I have sprinkled plenty throughout the article, but in my opinion having a list of aptronyms is only
1645:
I would prefer a much newer source than one from 1914. As for "mostly", where does the research stand as to Roman names in
Britain and what time perspective should be chosen? Also, mentioning epithets and not patronymics doesn't give a very balanced picture (leaving aside the question whether
1068:
be applied to. There's no insinuation of an actual causal effect, therefore there is no need for a source saying that such is real (which don't exist) -- but verified people (like a Bishop named Bishop) prove an illustrative example and their existence serves as primary sources.
863:
This concept is well recognised in Jewish tradition, which is referred to as "he is like his name" (I Samuel 25:25) without a clear indication as to whether the name determines fate or fate determines the name. The Talmud discusses whether a person's name influences his fate -
1966:
Note that the so called education of pupils - pedagogy where p=person - must involve some of this, because the purpose is exactly to make aware someone who is not yet completely. But of course there are methods that avoid trauma and other methods that rely on fear and trauma.
939:
it still is self-evident that if someone's name and occupation are the same, they surely fall into the putative category of
Nominative Determinism. Their sourced existence is itself a primary source and the article deserves to have a well-pared list of exemplars in it.
1232:, in which the artist writes to various American professionals to ask them whether they believe their surnames (Toothman, Reveal, Barber, etc.) influenced their choice of profession (dentist, psychologist, barber, respectively). There's reference to the work in
1957:
To be precise, nomen est omen lemmas probably means: notation from notion ontology organic membra = mielo execution mielo body approx. et nomen gens ereditary - cfr. evo, time summarise = probability calcuation towards (hypotetical new organism n)omen
827:
I would not really say it's very clear. I can see what the difference is, but if you need to re-read it to understand it, it's a bad sentence and should be put another way. I personally agree to this merger, though the difference should be made clear.
997:
reason to use real people as examples because the meaning can be sufficiently explained without adding "gosh I found another example" lists. Why not take a couple of days away from this article and the IP editor, then review my points above.
1909:
On the
Internet, this phenomenon is sometimes referred to as "eponysterical." I don't have reliable sources for this (just Urban Dictionary and a bunch of forums), so I'm not adding it to the article - just wanted to mention it.
1312:
I enjoyed reading this article, which I found via WP main site, especially gems like: "In 2015 researchers Limb, Limb, Limb and Limb published a paper on their study into the effect of surnames on medical specialisation...."
812:
Equivalently, Correlation does not imply
Causation, but Causation implies Correlation. For consistency, merging aptronym & ND would require we also merge causation & correlation. Which would render wikipedia a joke.
1154:
A list would be good but it would need to be well referenced with references that note the humorous association. Simply noting that somebody's name is closely related to their job is not acceptable here as it qualifies as
96:
35:
1110:
There is already referenced material in the article mentioning a few names. I see no reason to add swathes of OR to the article on the basis that the names just look right. If the names look apt they could be said to be
2087:
1287:
Messrs Argue and Phibbs were a well established firm of solicitors in Sligo, Ireland, and — despite the names — were very well regarded. Although the firm has been taken over, the name plate still lists them.
1929:
While I realize this does not meet the requirements of this list, I thought it was ironic that in 2010, a man was arrested for attempting to buy a 5 year old child online. The man's name was Patrick Molesti.
992:
No I'm not an admin, and the analogy should be clear: editors cannot add lists of examples unless secondary sources are used. This is not a forum where people make stuff up and add it to articles. There is
955:
showing that certain people born under whatever the sign for "fish" is (pisces?) are good swimmers (or marine biologists)? They might be obvious examples of true statements, but they are not appropriate.
1159:
and cannot be supported by references. Even if the name and job can be referenced, it would still need a robust reference to demonstrate that it has been recognized as nominative determinism elsewhere.
2082:
1436:
1115:, it's only nominative determinism if you can show a causal effect-but even moving those examples to the aptronym article, which is what I've done so far, just moves the OR problem somewhere else.
1826:
cited and the listed names should be replaced with names that might actually make some modicum of sense (e.g. the 19th century occupational surnames found in some Jewish communities). If a source
1970:
But in respect to this topic, nomen omen - also called omen nomen, cfr. orphans or apolids - can be a form of social harassment due to personal, religious, cultural or political conflicts.
732:
journals and deserves an article. I has become something of a boffins game to find them in technical journals. I just found all this on the random page, sorry if I am late to discussion. -
2092:
1764:
I was in the hospital once visiting my friend. Annoying loud speakers were trying to get the attention of Dr. Pepper. For some reason I was the only one who laughed. Best Regards,
2127:
479:
743:
talking about and how a name can decide the personality of a character. Interestingly, that would probably change with each reader. Maybe there is no author, only the reader.
60:
1228:
This is a neat article...congrats on passing FA! I'm not sure if it's possible to find a copy of or not, but I want to point to conceptual artist Don Celender's 1978 work
1870:
Far be it from me to deface a featured article with goofy crap like this, but in 1934 a man named Joe Hunter was in charge of the California Fish and Game Commission:
1332:
Seem to remember a documentary program about Emperors of India, one of whom used Nominative Determinism to choose his ministers. It apparently wasn't very successful
279:
2122:
384:
594:
2102:
269:
2112:
1558:
374:
489:
2142:
1834:
list those names, then I still don't think it belongs in the lede, and maybe there's another source out there that refutes this enormously silly argument.
791:
I have to say, I read the articles and could not for the life of me understand the difference. Maybe someone could explain it better and rewrite the lead?
584:
1933:
245:
2117:
350:
2147:
560:
2097:
1046:
they were making a joke about Wiener, making a joke of the fact that he got his wiener out but they didn't mention this theory as a causal effect.
2077:
2132:
2107:
1601:
I have performed three reverts in 24 hours so can no longer edit this article. I would like the sentences "In England it was mostly after the
455:
2137:
1695:
1245:
236:
213:
1647:
1116:
1084:
read of the article - these names association with this theory are uncited and imo original research being used to support this "theory" -
895:
341:
302:
1363:, there is a professor emeritus in the Physics department, whose name seems appropriate, especially for Particle Physics: Dr. Photinos.
2028:
1731:
1582:
1169:
but the response was simply another reversion so, in the spirit of cooperative editing, I have brought it here to get a consensus view.
1440:
551:
512:
1202:
2021:(/də ˈkwɪnsi/; né Thomas Penson Quincey; 15 August 1785 – 8 December 1859) was an English writer, essayist, and literary critic...
446:
407:
1291:
It's said that they once, in the 1920s, had the opportunity to take on a Mr Cheetam (Cheetham?) as a partner; sadly, they didn't.
1835:
1779:
675:
1963:
instance organising theathrical but actual events without explicitation to all the unaware agents involved with aware actors.
624:
predates Thomas Crapper! However, the statement about Thomas Crapper was an opinion, against Wiki policies so I removed it.
188:
1675:
1165:
nominative determinism (please see my edit summaries on reversion). I asked the contributor to bring the question here under
30:
926:
The example's list is a waste of time as it's etymologically linked to the English language when the surname might not be.
2060:
1479:
656:
1031:
spurious additions so it wouldn't grow too out of hand. The IP is reverting all of my edits, regardless of their content.
1475:
1378:
1233:
659:
is the webmaster of stormfront, a White power site. Not sure if irony is supposed to be included on this page or not.
158:
1934:
https://www.ajc.com/news/local/woodstock-man-accused-trying-buy-child-online-back-face-charges/JmUPUcstx07VK8GojqLeiJ/
154:
888:
Isn't there some cute or funny way to refer to nominative determinism? Perhaps the French phrase "nom de destin"?
53:
1915:
1360:
770:. While some text at the latter attempts to distinguish the two concepts, it completely fails to do so, is blatant
1248:
454:
articles on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1872:
1651:
1186:
blurring the line between aptronyms and nominative determinism. We're helping the reader by not having a list.
1120:
690:
176:
20:
899:
194:
40:
2032:
1586:
1980:
1855:
1795:
1774:
1735:
1191:
1136:
920:
2024:
1727:
1578:
1432:
1366:
1212:
891:
663:
1839:
1272:
1267:. I think it falls well within the April 1 spirit of featuring serious articles with a bizarre component.
1206:
1089:
1051:
763:
671:
162:
1976:
1911:
709:
559:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
349:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
244:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1617:
that surnames were added, although there were a few earlier bynames that were not hereditary, such as
748:
705:
1502:
1359:
DNA editing technique should be included, if only for the final 3 letters of her last name? Also, at
1237:
2048:
814:
667:
44:
1416:
1294:
1144:
1074:
1036:
1021:
1012:
What do you mean "take a couple of days away from the IP editor"? The one who's been wiki-stalking
983:
944:
818:
643:
1135:
I am very surprised that this article still doesn't have a list of examples. I would suggest that
422:
401:
1851:
1791:
1765:
1420:
1337:
1298:
1187:
1003:
960:
873:
833:
796:
333:
1721:
In the interest of balance some counter examples should be provided, such as Reality Winner.
2056:
2014:
1552:
1544:
1460:
1412:
1394:
1268:
1139:, who became the most senior judge in England & Wales, would be a good one for inclusion.
1085:
1047:
543:
1943:
1818:
1754:
1464:
1408:
1374:
777:
733:
625:
116:
1264:
1166:
771:
1814:
1790:
We Britons have alleged politician James Cleverly and “Mail On Sunday” editor Ted Verity.
1746:
1676:
https://improbable.com/2021/04/13/dr-i-c-notting-a-classic-case-of-nominative-determinism/
1630:
1618:
1614:
1602:
1498:
1404:
1352:
1318:
1016:??? So when I make good edits and the IP undoes them, I should let them stand? Ludicrous.
850:
Think of it as if someone give himself a surname or is being given a surname, more common.
438:
125:
1156:
919:. It is quite obvious what the English reader would think however for Indians she is the
1895:
1708:
McKinley, Richard: A History of British Surnames, Taylor & Francis, 1990, pp. 25-34
1140:
1070:
1032:
1017:
979:
940:
916:
694:
642:
as another example. A nice one this, particular as it links to a nice article on him.
2071:
1524:
1487:
1333:
999:
956:
869:
829:
792:
2052:
1548:
1537:
1456:
1390:
1173:
241:
2063:
2036:
2004:
1984:
1947:
1919:
1899:
1859:
1843:
1799:
1784:
1758:
1739:
1655:
1634:
1590:
1562:
1528:
1506:
1491:
1444:
1424:
1398:
1382:
1341:
1322:
1302:
1276:
1253:
1216:
1195:
1179:
1148:
1124:
1093:
1078:
1055:
1040:
1025:
1007:
987:
964:
948:
903:
878:
837:
822:
800:
785:
751:
736:
713:
699:
679:
646:
628:
1064:
saying that ND exists, but that it is a theory. The examples should be people it
807:
Re-read the last paragraph in each's lead. It makes the distinction pretty clear.
1974:
1939:
1750:
1370:
527:
506:
346:
327:
1995:
1626:
1314:
639:
556:
533:
428:
323:
1455:
This is one of the best! Kudos to the editors who edited and chose this one.
2001:
1998:. Dunkin' a basketball into the hoop. How can we work this into the article
1889:
1516:
1112:
228:
207:
1060:
Youreallycan, I don't think you're understanding the point. The article is
153:) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
1850:
see your argument about removing it from the lead, which I have just done.
432:
1520:
1483:
767:
451:
1606:
1519:, but apparently truly a charactonym) examples in the source. --John (
317:
296:
1813:
This is both uncited and absolutely ridiculous. The listed surnames,
1356:
747:
I am new here, but with regard to the signature requirements - huh?
1973:
I am a case study in this respect since 1975. For more information
704:
don black is inaptronym and is featured on the appropriate article
915:
For instance what does the theory say about the eponymously named
1478:. I tried to find a better example, but my initial pass through
868:. Will need to look up the quote, but possibly worth mentioning.
1722:
1572:
1476:
Dicken's character preceded the use of the word as being miserly
1259:
My congratulations as well. For what it's worth, I felt free to
1236:. I hope this is useful, or at least interesting! All the best,
934:
The examples previously listed served merely to be just that --
1497:
Scrooge the character coming first was also my understanding.
170:
111:
1515:
I've swapped Scrooge with one of the other (the less famous
1646:
patronymics at this time were thought of as names at all).
930:
Original Research in the examples of Nominative Determinism
2088:
Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
1938:
I learned about it from the Subreddit r/todayilearned .
1925:
Man with appropriate name arrested for child molestation
59:
This article appeared on Knowledge (XXG)'s Main Page as
1685:
1683:
1260:
89:
2083:
Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
1745:
Or perhaps the Chief of Police of Portland, Oregon,
974:
and the list is of those to whom the putative label
555:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
450:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
345:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
240:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
2093:Knowledge (XXG) articles that use British English
1605:that surnames were added. But there were earlier
1429:Eye doctor at Leiden University: I.C. Notting
8:
2128:Low-importance WikiProject Business articles
43:. Even so, if you can update or improve it,
39:as one of the best articles produced by the
33:; it (or a previous version of it) has been
2022:
1866:Not sure where this goes, but I found one.
1725:
1694:sfn error: no target: CITEREFWeekley1914 (
1625:which is what the sources actually state.
1576:
1482:did not prove fruitful. Anyone? --John (
1430:
1364:
1210:
501:
396:
291:
202:
129:, which has its own spelling conventions (
68:
15:
1879:. Whittier, California. 1934-09-25. p. 5
1543:Yes, he played cricket. No, he wasn't a
254:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Anthroponymy
174:
1723:https://en.wikipedia.org/Reality_Winner
1689:
1668:
1609:that were not hereditary." changed to:
1573:https://en.wikipedia.org/Lawrie_Creamer
1437:2001:1C01:4B03:C000:4A03:C48C:D288:C6C5
503:
398:
359:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Linguistics
293:
204:
2123:FA-Class WikiProject Business articles
569:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Psychology
1873:"Duck Refuge Proves Boon to Ranchmen"
910:Names based on the English language??
754:Tafkal Folly (hope I got this right)
620:After research, it would appear that
161:, this should not be changed without
7:
2103:Low-importance Anthroponymy articles
549:This article is within the scope of
464:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Business
444:This article is within the scope of
339:This article is within the scope of
234:This article is within the scope of
2113:Low-importance Linguistics articles
1474:Like crapper above, it appears the
193:It is of interest to the following
2143:Low-importance psychology articles
1575:Working in milk protein science.
14:
2078:Knowledge (XXG) featured articles
1613:In England it was only after the
1407:, who made a name for himself in
257:Template:WikiProject Anthroponymy
2118:WikiProject Linguistics articles
536:
526:
505:
431:
421:
400:
362:Template:WikiProject Linguistics
326:
316:
295:
227:
206:
175:
115:
52:
19:
2148:WikiProject Psychology articles
1994:Famous basketball player named
1355:, one of the developers of the
762:Renewed proposal for merger of
589:This article has been rated as
572:Template:WikiProject Psychology
484:This article has been rated as
379:This article has been rated as
274:This article has been rated as
2098:FA-Class Anthroponymy articles
1149:10:19, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
1:
2133:WikiProject Business articles
2108:FA-Class Linguistics articles
1948:05:49, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
1900:04:43, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
1860:17:24, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
1785:20:53, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
1591:21:44, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
1480:List of Dickensian characters
838:00:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
823:22:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
801:12:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
629:12:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
563:and see a list of open tasks.
470:WikiProject Business articles
467:Template:WikiProject Business
458:and see a list of open tasks.
353:and see a list of open tasks.
248:and see a list of open tasks.
2138:FA-Class psychology articles
2037:12:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
1920:01:15, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
1277:12:24, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
1254:12:42, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
1217:19:02, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
1180:16:03, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
904:06:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
786:06:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
680:19:48, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
647:18:48, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
2005:19:05, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
1844:15:54, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
1445:19:52, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
1263:it for this year's April 1
1125:15:25, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
1094:16:12, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
1079:16:10, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
1056:11:15, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
1041:06:56, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
1026:06:52, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
1008:06:11, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
988:04:05, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
965:04:00, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
949:03:08, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
700:10:17, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
242:the study of people's names
2164:
1740:12:41, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
1361:Southern Oregon University
1303:23:43, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
737:14:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
714:15:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
595:project's importance scale
490:project's importance scale
385:project's importance scale
280:project's importance scale
97:Featured article candidate
2064:09:48, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
1985:14:33, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
1800:19:54, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
1759:17:17, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
1656:14:33, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
1635:07:33, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
1563:10:49, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
1529:20:39, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
1507:02:18, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
1492:21:47, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
1465:16:47, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
1399:16:47, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
1383:16:36, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
1342:10:49, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
1323:06:29, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
1196:07:01, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
752:23:44, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
588:
521:
483:
416:
378:
311:
273:
222:
201:
71:
67:
41:Knowledge (XXG) community
237:WikiProject Anthroponymy
61:Today's featured article
1450:
1425:20:07, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
921:Chief Minister of Delhi
879:06:07, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
342:WikiProject Linguistics
1830:make the argument and
1642:Why de-link "bynames"?
1167:bold , revert, discuss
764:nominative determinism
729:from the aptronym page
552:WikiProject Psychology
183:This article is rated
27:Nominative determinism
1886:– via Newspapers.com.
260:Anthroponymy articles
187:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
1451:April Fool's article
724:Merge with Aptronym?
691:Eugène Terre'Blanche
652:Don Black suggestion
447:WikiProject Business
365:Linguistics articles
159:relevant style guide
155:varieties of English
2043:Spotted in the wild
1411:, was originally a
689:More to the point,
575:psychology articles
157:. According to the
1953:social engineering
334:Linguistics portal
189:content assessment
72:Article milestones
2039:
2027:comment added by
1877:The Whittier News
1782:
1777:
1771:
1742:
1730:comment added by
1593:
1581:comment added by
1561:
1447:
1435:comment added by
1413:chemical engineer
1385:
1369:comment added by
1230:Destiny of a Name
1219:
1157:original research
894:comment added by
876:
772:original research
683:
666:comment added by
609:
608:
605:
604:
601:
600:
544:Psychology portal
500:
499:
496:
495:
395:
394:
391:
390:
290:
289:
286:
285:
169:
168:
110:
109:
106:
105:
90:December 22, 2016
63:on April 1, 2017.
2155:
1912:Birdsinthewindow
1887:
1885:
1884:
1780:
1775:
1772:
1767:
1717:Counter examples
1709:
1706:
1700:
1699:
1687:
1678:
1673:
1556:
1409:computer science
1283:Argue and Phibbs
1243:
1178:
1131:List of examples
906:
874:
780:
682:
660:
577:
576:
573:
570:
567:
546:
541:
540:
539:
530:
523:
522:
517:
509:
502:
472:
471:
468:
465:
462:
441:
436:
435:
425:
418:
417:
412:
404:
397:
367:
366:
363:
360:
357:
336:
331:
330:
320:
313:
312:
307:
299:
292:
262:
261:
258:
255:
252:
231:
224:
223:
218:
210:
203:
186:
180:
179:
171:
122:This article is
119:
112:
92:
69:
56:
31:featured article
23:
16:
2163:
2162:
2158:
2157:
2156:
2154:
2153:
2152:
2068:
2067:
2045:
2012:
1992:
1955:
1927:
1907:
1882:
1880:
1871:
1868:
1811:
1807:
1766:
1747:Danielle Outlaw
1719:
1714:
1713:
1712:
1707:
1703:
1693:
1688:
1681:
1674:
1670:
1619:Edmund Ironside
1615:Norman conquest
1603:Norman conquest
1599:
1570:
1541:
1472:
1453:
1405:Elliot Organick
1353:Jennifer Doudna
1349:
1330:
1310:
1285:
1251:
1241:
1226:
1170:
1133:
932:
912:
889:
886:
861:
776:
760:
726:
661:
654:
636:
614:
574:
571:
568:
565:
564:
542:
537:
535:
515:
469:
466:
463:
460:
459:
439:Business portal
437:
430:
410:
364:
361:
358:
355:
354:
332:
325:
305:
259:
256:
253:
250:
249:
216:
184:
163:broad consensus
126:British English
88:
12:
11:
5:
2161:
2159:
2151:
2150:
2145:
2140:
2135:
2130:
2125:
2120:
2115:
2110:
2105:
2100:
2095:
2090:
2085:
2080:
2070:
2069:
2049:Razor Creative
2044:
2041:
2011:
2008:
1991:
1988:
1961:
1954:
1951:
1926:
1923:
1906:
1903:
1867:
1864:
1863:
1862:
1808:
1806:
1805:Genetic theory
1803:
1788:
1787:
1718:
1715:
1711:
1710:
1701:
1679:
1667:
1666:
1662:
1661:
1660:
1659:
1658:
1648:151.177.62.193
1643:
1623:
1622:
1598:
1595:
1569:
1568:Lawrie Creamer
1566:
1559:old fashioned!
1540:
1535:
1534:
1533:
1532:
1531:
1510:
1509:
1471:
1468:
1452:
1449:
1402:
1401:
1348:
1345:
1329:
1326:
1309:
1306:
1284:
1281:
1280:
1279:
1249:
1225:
1222:
1221:
1220:
1215:comment added
1183:
1182:
1161:
1160:
1132:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1117:89.100.150.198
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1100:
1099:
1098:
1097:
1096:
1028:
931:
928:
917:Sheila Dikshit
911:
908:
896:75.139.158.156
885:
882:
860:
859:Biblical quote
857:
856:
855:
854:
853:
852:
851:
843:
842:
841:
840:
810:
808:
804:
803:
759:
758:Merge proposal
756:
745:
744:
725:
722:
721:
720:
719:
718:
717:
716:
653:
650:
635:
632:
613:
612:Thomas Crapper
610:
607:
606:
603:
602:
599:
598:
591:Low-importance
587:
581:
580:
578:
561:the discussion
548:
547:
531:
519:
518:
516:Low‑importance
510:
498:
497:
494:
493:
486:Low-importance
482:
476:
475:
473:
456:the discussion
443:
442:
426:
414:
413:
411:Low‑importance
405:
393:
392:
389:
388:
381:Low-importance
377:
371:
370:
368:
351:the discussion
338:
337:
321:
309:
308:
306:Low‑importance
300:
288:
287:
284:
283:
276:Low-importance
272:
266:
265:
263:
246:the discussion
232:
220:
219:
217:Low‑importance
211:
199:
198:
192:
181:
167:
166:
120:
108:
107:
104:
103:
100:
93:
85:
84:
81:
78:
74:
73:
65:
64:
57:
49:
48:
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2160:
2149:
2146:
2144:
2141:
2139:
2136:
2134:
2131:
2129:
2126:
2124:
2121:
2119:
2116:
2114:
2111:
2109:
2106:
2104:
2101:
2099:
2096:
2094:
2091:
2089:
2086:
2084:
2081:
2079:
2076:
2075:
2073:
2066:
2065:
2062:
2059:
2058:
2054:
2050:
2042:
2040:
2038:
2034:
2030:
2029:88.152.11.231
2026:
2020:
2018:
2009:
2007:
2006:
2003:
1999:
1997:
1989:
1987:
1986:
1982:
1978:
1977:Sabrina.ponsi
1975:
1971:
1968:
1964:
1959:
1952:
1950:
1949:
1945:
1941:
1936:
1935:
1931:
1924:
1922:
1921:
1917:
1913:
1905:Eponysterical
1904:
1902:
1901:
1898:
1897:
1892:
1891:
1878:
1874:
1865:
1861:
1857:
1853:
1852:Edwininlondon
1848:
1847:
1846:
1845:
1841:
1837:
1833:
1829:
1824:
1823:patrilineally
1820:
1816:
1804:
1802:
1801:
1797:
1793:
1792:Mr Larrington
1786:
1783:
1778:
1773:
1770:
1763:
1762:
1761:
1760:
1756:
1752:
1748:
1743:
1741:
1737:
1733:
1732:77.86.117.208
1729:
1724:
1716:
1705:
1702:
1697:
1691:
1686:
1684:
1680:
1677:
1672:
1669:
1665:
1657:
1653:
1649:
1644:
1641:
1640:
1639:
1638:
1637:
1636:
1632:
1628:
1620:
1616:
1612:
1611:
1610:
1608:
1604:
1596:
1594:
1592:
1588:
1584:
1583:209.93.17.155
1580:
1574:
1567:
1565:
1564:
1560:
1554:
1550:
1546:
1539:
1536:
1530:
1526:
1522:
1518:
1514:
1513:
1512:
1511:
1508:
1504:
1500:
1496:
1495:
1494:
1493:
1489:
1485:
1481:
1477:
1469:
1467:
1466:
1462:
1458:
1448:
1446:
1442:
1438:
1434:
1427:
1426:
1422:
1418:
1414:
1410:
1406:
1400:
1396:
1392:
1388:
1387:
1386:
1384:
1380:
1376:
1372:
1368:
1362:
1358:
1354:
1346:
1344:
1343:
1339:
1335:
1327:
1325:
1324:
1320:
1316:
1307:
1305:
1304:
1300:
1296:
1292:
1289:
1282:
1278:
1274:
1270:
1266:
1262:
1258:
1257:
1256:
1255:
1252:
1247:
1244:
1240:
1235:
1234:this document
1231:
1223:
1218:
1214:
1208:
1204:
1200:
1199:
1198:
1197:
1193:
1189:
1188:Edwininlondon
1181:
1177:
1176:
1175:
1168:
1163:
1162:
1158:
1153:
1152:
1151:
1150:
1146:
1142:
1138:
1130:
1126:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1109:
1095:
1091:
1087:
1082:
1081:
1080:
1076:
1072:
1067:
1063:
1059:
1058:
1057:
1053:
1049:
1044:
1043:
1042:
1038:
1034:
1029:
1027:
1023:
1019:
1015:
1011:
1010:
1009:
1005:
1001:
996:
991:
990:
989:
985:
981:
977:
973:
968:
967:
966:
962:
958:
953:
952:
951:
950:
946:
942:
937:
929:
927:
924:
922:
918:
909:
907:
905:
901:
897:
893:
884:nom de destin
883:
881:
880:
877:
871:
867:
858:
849:
848:
847:
846:
845:
844:
839:
835:
831:
826:
825:
824:
820:
816:
811:
809:
806:
805:
802:
798:
794:
790:
789:
788:
787:
784:
781:
779:
773:
769:
765:
757:
755:
753:
750:
741:
740:
739:
738:
735:
730:
723:
715:
711:
707:
703:
702:
701:
698:
697:
692:
688:
687:
686:
685:
684:
681:
677:
673:
669:
665:
658:
651:
649:
648:
645:
641:
633:
631:
630:
627:
623:
618:
611:
596:
592:
586:
583:
582:
579:
562:
558:
554:
553:
545:
534:
532:
529:
525:
524:
520:
514:
511:
508:
504:
491:
487:
481:
478:
477:
474:
457:
453:
449:
448:
440:
434:
429:
427:
424:
420:
419:
415:
409:
406:
403:
399:
386:
382:
376:
373:
372:
369:
352:
348:
344:
343:
335:
329:
324:
322:
319:
315:
314:
310:
304:
301:
298:
294:
281:
277:
271:
268:
267:
264:
247:
243:
239:
238:
233:
230:
226:
225:
221:
215:
212:
209:
205:
200:
196:
190:
182:
178:
173:
172:
164:
160:
156:
152:
148:
144:
140:
136:
132:
128:
127:
121:
118:
114:
113:
101:
99:
98:
94:
91:
87:
86:
82:
79:
76:
75:
70:
66:
62:
58:
55:
51:
50:
46:
42:
38:
37:
32:
28:
25:
22:
18:
17:
2055:
2046:
2023:— Preceding
2016:
2013:
2000:
1993:
1972:
1969:
1965:
1960:
1956:
1937:
1932:
1928:
1908:
1894:
1888:
1881:. Retrieved
1876:
1869:
1831:
1827:
1822:
1812:
1789:
1768:
1744:
1726:— Preceding
1720:
1704:
1690:Weekley 1914
1671:
1663:
1624:
1600:
1597:Edit request
1577:— Preceding
1571:
1542:
1538:Peter Bowler
1473:
1454:
1431:— Preceding
1428:
1403:
1365:— Preceding
1351:I wonder if
1350:
1331:
1311:
1293:
1290:
1286:
1269:No such user
1242:Amnertiopsis
1238:
1229:
1227:
1224:Don Celender
1203:87.102.44.18
1184:
1172:
1171:
1134:
1086:Youreallycan
1065:
1061:
1048:Youreallycan
1013:
994:
975:
971:
935:
933:
925:
913:
890:— Preceding
887:
865:
862:
782:
775:
761:
746:
728:
727:
695:
655:
637:
621:
619:
615:
590:
550:
485:
445:
380:
340:
275:
251:Anthroponymy
235:
214:Anthroponymy
195:WikiProjects
150:
146:
142:
138:
134:
130:
123:
95:
45:please do so
34:
26:
1211:—Preceding
978:be applied.
778:SMcCandlish
749:Tafkalfolly
706:DParkinson1
662:—Preceding
626:MortimerCat
356:Linguistics
347:linguistics
303:Linguistics
124:written in
2072:Categories
2019:De Quincey
1996:Tim Duncan
1990:Tim Duncan
1883:2021-11-18
1836:50.79.5.81
1664:References
1499:Brutannica
1347:More names
1137:Mr I Judge
640:Lord Brain
634:Lord Brain
566:Psychology
557:Psychology
513:Psychology
36:identified
2047:I PRODed
1769:Barbara
1517:Gradgrind
1141:MrStoofer
1113:aptronyms
1071:JesseRafe
1033:JesseRafe
1018:JesseRafe
980:JesseRafe
941:JesseRafe
866:shma grim
815:Saltation
696:Chameleon
668:Bhpayne23
657:Don Black
135:travelled
2025:unsigned
1728:unsigned
1692:, p. 68.
1579:unsigned
1521:User:Jwy
1484:User:Jwy
1433:unsigned
1417:JHobson3
1379:contribs
1367:unsigned
1334:Tabletop
1295:Korhomme
1261:nominate
1000:Johnuniq
957:Johnuniq
936:examples
892:unsigned
830:mattbuck
793:mattbuck
768:aptronym
676:contribs
664:unsigned
644:Routlej1
461:Business
452:business
408:Business
185:FA-class
147:artefact
102:Promoted
2015:Thomas
1607:bynames
1557:Become
1549:Dweller
1470:Scrooge
1457:Bearian
1391:Bearian
1328:Emperor
1250:ChatMe!
1213:undated
1174:Velella
783:‹(-¿-)›
593:on the
488:on the
383:on the
278:on the
151:analyse
143:defence
80:Process
2017:Penson
2010:Penson
1940:DaKine
1819:Taylor
1751:DaKine
1545:bowler
1371:DaKine
1357:CRISPR
1265:WP:TFA
972:theory
638:Added
191:scale.
139:centre
131:colour
83:Result
1815:Smith
1627:DrKay
1389:LOL.
1315:Zezen
1308:Kudos
1066:could
976:could
693:. —
29:is a
2053:Tera
2033:talk
2002:iRDM
1981:talk
1944:talk
1916:talk
1856:talk
1840:talk
1832:does
1828:does
1817:and
1796:talk
1755:talk
1736:talk
1696:help
1652:talk
1631:talk
1587:talk
1553:talk
1547:. --
1525:talk
1503:talk
1488:talk
1461:talk
1441:talk
1421:talk
1395:talk
1375:talk
1338:talk
1319:talk
1299:talk
1273:talk
1207:talk
1192:talk
1145:talk
1121:talk
1090:talk
1075:talk
1052:talk
1037:talk
1022:talk
1004:talk
984:talk
961:talk
945:talk
900:talk
875:T@lk
834:talk
819:talk
797:talk
766:and
734:Fred
710:talk
672:talk
622:crap
77:Date
2057:tix
1239:Bob
1209:)
1062:not
923:.
870:JFW
585:Low
480:Low
375:Low
270:Low
2074::
2035:)
1983:)
1946:)
1918:)
1890:jp
1875:.
1858:)
1842:)
1798:)
1757:)
1749:.
1738:)
1682:^
1654:)
1633:)
1589:)
1555:)
1527:)
1505:)
1490:)
1463:)
1443:)
1423:)
1415:.
1397:)
1381:)
1377:•
1340:)
1321:)
1301:)
1275:)
1194:)
1147:)
1123:)
1092:)
1077:)
1054:)
1039:)
1024:)
1014:me
1006:)
995:no
986:)
963:)
947:)
902:)
872:|
836:)
821:)
799:)
712:)
678:)
674:•
149:,
145:,
141:,
137:,
133:,
2061:₵
2031:(
1979:(
1942:(
1914:(
1896:g
1893:×
1854:(
1838:(
1794:(
1781:✉
1776:✐
1753:(
1734:(
1698:)
1650:(
1629:(
1621:.
1585:(
1551:(
1523:/
1501:(
1486:/
1459:(
1439:(
1419:(
1393:(
1373:(
1336:(
1317:(
1297:(
1271:(
1246:∴
1205:(
1190:(
1143:(
1119:(
1088:(
1073:(
1050:(
1035:(
1020:(
1002:(
982:(
959:(
943:(
898:(
832:(
817:(
795:(
708:(
670:(
597:.
492:.
387:.
282:.
197::
165:.
47:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
-logo-v2.svg.png){kind=logo}
