I think the “actually more popular than the original” in the description for [name_m]Ruben[/name_m] is referring to the fact that in the US [name_m]Ruben[/name_m] is more popular than [name_m]Reuben[/name_m], the latter being the traditional spelling in [name_f]English[/name_f]. I don’t think it’s saying that it would be surprising for [name_m]Ruben[/name_m] to be more popular in the Netherlands given that, like you said, it’s the traditional spelling there.
Thanks for clarifying that! I found it in the post on [name_m]Dutch[/name_m] names so assumed to related to the Netherlands.
The commentary on [name_f]Iekeliene[/name_f] feels very unnecessary and rude.
[name_f]Zenobia[/name_f] has some outdated ranking descriptions
Ugh, I hate those kinds of descriptions
Why does?? Arthur?? Have a girl page?? And it’s blank
Is this like what happened to [name_f]Emilia[/name_f] and [name_f]Olivia[/name_f] before? They suddenly had blank boy name pages. [name_u]Or[/name_u] did you really add [name_u]Arthur[/name_u] for a girl?
The name [name_u]Henry[/name_u] shows up green, but the girl’s page is blank and the boy’s page says it is a boys’ name.
yeah i’ve noticed a bunch of names have turned green lately but havent had the other gender filled in with any sort of info
I hate to say it, but with the [name_f]Delta[/name_f] variant going around, I’m wondering if that should be added to the references list for the name [name_f]Delta[/name_f]