Like it must. I remember playing around with name elaborations, and imagining what it would be like to be called different international variations of my name. Nothing came of it in terms of what Iām called, but I believe that was part of what sparked my interest in names in the first place all those years ago.
Edit: Iāve also heard of people socially changing the spelling of their name to something that is more likely to be pronounced as desired, without going through that process legally. So like I could see the same sort of social change happen with a nickname name to something longer, especially are occasionally in correcting assuming that the longer version is their given name.
I know a [name_m]Thomas[/name_m] who is legally a [name_u]Tommy[/name_u]. Heās a [name_m]Jr[/name_m]. and it started out as a joke nickname (longname?) and he just always stuck with it
Sense almost appears to be something I slightly dislike making (Itās a joke)
But
I donāt really like [name_f]Rainbow[/name_f] as a name, and I donāt like reignbow as a spelling of rainbow. But I like [name_f]Reignbow[/name_f] as a name separate to [name_f]Rainbow[/name_f].
[name_f]Rainbow[/name_f] is childish, but [name_f]Reignbow[/name_f]. Theres something so regal about her (most likely reign)
How much leeway is a name granted in regards to āusabilityā, and what makes a name āaccessibleā (acceptable to name a child) vs a name where youād get raised eyebrows and judgment on how you could have possibly named your child something so archaic and old - fashioned? Maybe this is supposed to be obvious, but I feel like oftentimes, a names usability depends not on its rarity/length/pronunciation/associations, though they certainly matter, but more on like the popularity of related names, and how close it fits with the name trends and the specific vowels and consonants in vogue. This is why names like [name_u]Florence[/name_u], [name_f]Mabel[/name_f], [name_u]Hazel[/name_u], [name_f]Dorothy[/name_f], [name_f]Beatrice[/name_f], [name_f]Eleanor[/name_f], [name_f]Matilda[/name_f], and [name_f]Edith[/name_f] are in and trendy (at least within naming circles), while [name_f]Gertrude[/name_f], [name_f]Gladys[/name_f], and [name_f]Ethel[/name_f] are not. But even now, no one would bat an eye at you naming your daughter [name_f]Amelia[/name_f], [name_f]Julia[/name_f], [name_f]Victoria[/name_f], [name_f]Olivia[/name_f], [name_f]Ophelia[/name_f], but if you name your daughter [name_f]Cornelia[/name_f], youād get comments on how what a brave choice that was. So what makes [name_f]Cornelia[/name_f] a gp in comparison to other similar Latin/Greek names that were popular in the past and usable now (Cynthia, [name_f]Claudia[/name_f], [name_f]Cecilia[/name_f], and Cassandra)? Same thing with [name_f]Penelope[/name_f], which is acceptable, but names like [name_f]Calliope[/name_f], [name_f]Iolanthe[/name_f], and [name_f]Persephone[/name_f], which are steps too far for non namenerds?
Seconded. In the U.S., itās in the sweet spot of a name everyone knows, but isnāt that common (well, except amongst older Hispanic and Italian ladies in my experience).
Thatās how Iāve been trying to see [name_u]Wilder[/name_u], but then my brain just goes āwhatās a wilder?ā So Iām afraid Iām with @Inlakesh on this one.
Defending my poor [name_u]Wilder[/name_u] here [name_u]Wilder[/name_u] as a surname may date back as far as the 10th century. Itās very much a name in its own right
I love [name_u]Wilder[/name_u] so much! But āwilder than whatā really made me giggle! This is actually why we didnāt think we could use it as name for our third child, because everyone would say, āso, is he wilderrrrr than the other two?ā lol
Iāve somewhat have been able to separate [name_u]Wilder[/name_u] as a name from the adjective since thereās a building at my alma mater called [name_u]Wilder[/name_u] Hall*, so I spent 4 years saying things like āoh thats next to Wilderā. But that being said, I havenāt separated it quite enough from the word to remotely consider it for a name or anything.
As an aside given that I have ADHD, my kids would likely have it too as thereās a big hereditary component. So if my childhood is any indication, [name_u]Wilder[/name_u] would be wilder than his peers.
*
I checked and there are numerous colleges with various [name_u]Wilder[/name_u] Halls so this isnāt as identifying as it could be.
I have friends who used [name_u]Wilder[/name_u] as a middle for their (now teenage) son, because they found out they were pregnant during a move from the city to the āwilderness.ā Made sense to me
I also now have a 1-year-old nephew with [name_u]Wilder[/name_u] as a middle, and all I know is that my sister-in-law liked it! Sheād have put it up front, but my brother didnāt love it quite as much.
I was giving someone names (or advice) on the quick questions thread. They wanted adventurous naturey names.
I listed a few possibilites, and I included [name_u]Wilder[/name_u]. Then an image popped into my head of a little messy haired boy playing in a wooded garden. It was too cute.
[name_u]Ever[/name_u] since then Iāve been thinking of making a combo for [name_u]Wilder[/name_u]. Before that, It didnāt make sense, so I can partially relate.
Does anyone else feel like sometimes sibsets can be a little TOO cohesive (at least so far as combos go)? I totally understand wanting cohesion to some extent, even if itās not something I personally care about much, but I donāt get it when people are so meticulous about it that all the firsts and middles have to be the same style, same length, same popularity, etc, at which point they all start to blend into each other and almost feel like variations of the same name instead of individuals.
And it gets worse the more siblings there are. For example [name_f]Annie[/name_f] [name_f]Margaret[/name_f] and [name_f]Rosie[/name_f] [name_f]Katherine[/name_f] arenāt too bad, Iād say theyāre almost satisfying together, but when [name_f]Gracie[/name_f] [name_f]Charlotte[/name_f] comes into the mix it makes all the names feel dull to me even though Iād like them each individually.
it doesnāt bother me in sibsets, but i do notice it in UCs like, i love a cohesive UC, but sometimes when the combos are really samey i feel like names iād otherwise like lose their sparkle!
When Iām making a sibset, I go by imagery rather than style/length/popularity.
Example: A, old fashioned, dated, clunky name could have the same imagery, for me atleast, as something modern and trendy.
I think my UC is very mismatched. Most of the names are in sibsets and for me have some sort of fantasy feel, but aside from imagery, they are very different. The sibsetās themselves are a little cohesive, but also different. One of the sibsets follows a pattern, so the names are the same type without actually being the same.
I feel this so much, but itās especially with sounds for me, and I really struggle with it myself. I do try not to do it, but I swear Iām just drawn to certain sounds. Like, how am I only just seeing the āanā in [name_f]Pandora[/name_f] and [name_m]Lysander[/name_m], and [name_m]Caspian[/name_m] (my top names) ?
.
So Iām afraid Iām with 
This is actually why we didnāt think we could use it as name for our third child, because everyone would say, āso, is he wilderrrrr than the other two?ā lol
?