Talk:Name

ive fot the coolest name evr

The article claims that there are "at least three" series of parallel streets that are named alphabetically in San Francisco, but I can only think of one series, the Sunset District streets referenced direectly in the article. Could somebody please clarify where the other two series are?The Opressed One 19:43, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

uncharted pieces

i'd suggest a disambiguity step: named - interned domain name server daemon.

---

It seems to be that the external link "Copernicus Consulting - Trademark & Naming Experts" is less of a useful link and more of an advertisment for a service.

---

It seems like the names of persons section should be in a separate article, but Personal name is misleading, since the term is commonly a synonym for first name. Name of a person is graceless but accurate. Also, Arabic name etc should be something like Names of Arabic persons or some such, since they don't say anything about the naming of places or objects. Stan 07:32 31 May 2003 (UTC)

I agree completely. I'm starting Human names. Akb4 20:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

---

Posted by an anon user under Common and Scientific Names; not sure what they meant, as there is no such article. Elf | Talk 00:39, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I was wondering the Name density of everyone. Please go to that topic and edit it.

Elf | Talk 00:39, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Someone said spam?

"the word name is also used for cow killing in New York"

This doesn't sound to me like it means anything. Delete?

Similar names are an intresting annomaly in the English language, and for that matter culcture. Names like Janice and Deborah can be, for all practical purposes, be considered similar as one. Conversly, uncommon names, like Chad, do not actually exist in the real world. The essence of fiction.

Not only Iceland

In Russia (as well as at the very least Ukraine and Belarus) patronymics are used until this very day. A person has first name, patronimyc and than family name Beta m

Low quality?

"Behind the Name etymology of names" has been removed under the pretence of being low quality website, but personally i have managed to find much more information on it than on Ancestry.com, and the information is actually internationalised not limited to United States, which is very important (you know there are other countries out there. I'll wait for a responce, and then restore the link if there will be no reason provided to back up why this was a "low quality website." Beta_M ^talk, |^contrib (Ë-Mail)

Since behindthename.com is for first names only, the link should only be in the Given name article (which does have the BTN link). The ancestry.com link covers both first and last names. It is unfortunate that name selection for ancestry.com is so American/British-centric, but the Oxford books they use for references do give some of the most complete and most accurate name etymologies that I have ever seen. Compare "Gregory", for example, where the ancestry.com information is the only place that I've ever seen that explains why the name was so popular with popes and saints (it's basically an ecclesiastical pun)—compare [1] with [2]. What I most wanted to do was delete the babynamebox.com link, which has been spammed into practically every name-oriented article in the Wikipedia, and has very minimal definitions (plus eliminate the MSN "dress" in the ancestry.com link). If you really want to add the link back in, I will not get into a revert war, but I hope that you understand my reasoning. BlankVerse ∅ 05:21, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Point about given names taken, i won't put it back. I just found this link while searching for something else, and thought i'd add it to this article, not realising that it was already available in the one that is more appropriate. Beta_M ^talk, |^contrib (Ë-Mail)

Proper names, in intro

Can the intro be fixed by someone more knowledgable, as to whether it includes named non-living entities or not. For example the following:

• "My dog's name is Jim"
• "That building is Buckingham Palace"
• "The planet's name is Jupiter"

FT2 (Talk) 10:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

nyc example

I'm rewriting the bit about nyc street names. Right now it reads:

In Manhattan, street names are numbers and East-West streets are "Streets" whereas North-South streets are "Avenues".

I think this would be pretty rough to read for many people, especially if they aren't totally fluent in English. Akb4 19:09, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Verbal Usage for naming?

I hate to be well, how do you say, technical, or overtly politically correct, but... The line which reads that "naming" is a "verbal" label, sort of struck me as odd. Because language has a wide variety of adaptations, some of which are non-verbal, such as ASL, better known as American Sign Language, commonly used by the Deaf or Hard of Hearing, I have taken out the word "verbal". Also, almost every culture around the world has used visual, facial, or body cues to express ideas, and/or emotions. These are also non-verbal elements. A deaf person does have the ability to name things.

Thanks, Ryver wolf 69.245.175.43 04:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The word verbal seems to have taken over from oral in popular language, because oral gives some people the giggles, but the root verbum means word. The elements of sign language are words – discrete arbitrary signs – even though their medium is different. —Tamfang 06:09, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

cynonymy

WHy is DOG names linked from this page?

Why not? —Tamfang 02:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Because its been decided its not relevant to link to human name websites. Linking to a dog name site, from a names page is clearly link spam. If its not, then its just as relevant to add at least another 100 links at the bottom of the page, to cat anmes, fish names, people names, muslim names, boy names etc, any type of name.

This is a link to a commercial site for the purpose of internet marketing on the term "dog names". It is not a link made for the purpose of providing a relevant link to a site having real value to the topic of names.

Animal use of names

I have removed the above section, which had the text:

Recently, research has demonstrated a long-speculated concept in animal communication - that at least one species other than humans uses symbolic, personal, names. At present this has been identified only in dolphins, who use whistling communication to convey information including the equivalent of personal names. The names are specific to individuals, who will respond even when voice, speaker, inflection and other cues are removed from the sound.[3] [4].

This is a misleading summary of the research. In reality, dolphins do not use whistles in any sense remotely similar to the human use of names. What the research showed was merely that a dolphin can identify another dolphin by listening to the other dolphin's personal whistle. Dolphins do not then go on to use other dolphins' whistles to refer to that dolphin, or anything of the sort.

See Language Log's summary. — Haeleth Talk 09:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Doubled first section

Why is section "Use of names" repeated twice on screen now (20:03, 15 December 2006 (UTC)) but is just once in the source code?

rozek19

Self-reference

There are two links to Wikipedia:Naming conventions. One ought to be removed, but which one: the one at the top (because it is more on-topic under the header) or the one under the naming conventions header (because it's not helpful if Wikipedians can't access it easily)? --Gray Porpoise_{Your wish is my command!} 22:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)