I love [name_f]Jane[/name_f] as a first name, but our last name is Peters and I worry it ends up sounding too dull or generic. If we used it we would choose a 3+ syllable middle name to spice it up (some of my favorites are [name_f]Miriam[/name_f], [name_f]Delores[/name_f], or [name_f]Isobel[/name_f]) but middle names don’t get used that often… Is [name_f]Jane[/name_f] Peters too bland? Would [name_f]Joan[/name_f] be any better (or worse)?
I like [name_f]Jane[/name_f].
[name_f]Jane[/name_f] Peters is definitely not exotic and sultry but it’s a very pretty name. If you love it, then go for it.
She can always go by her mn or a nn if she wants something more exciting.
I don’t think it’s too bland/boring. To me it’s classic/timeless/elegant. It’s kind of like a little black dress or pearls. Some people might argue that it’s boring, but it will never go out of style and will never date her.
[name_f]Jane[/name_f] is fresher than [name_f]Joan[/name_f]. I think it’s fine…Classic, professional, competent-sounding.
[name_f]Jane[/name_f] is much better than [name_f]Joan[/name_f]. I think [name_f]Jane[/name_f] Peters is cute, classic and timeless. She will stand out for that in a time of ‘unique’ spellings and made up names.
[name_f]Jane[/name_f] might not be ‘flashy’ or ‘exotic’ but I love it. I see [name_f]Jane[/name_f] Peters as timeless and lovely 
I don’t personally like [name_f]Joan[/name_f] too much. [name_f]Jane[/name_f] [name_f]Miriam[/name_f] and [name_f]Jane[/name_f] [name_f]Delores[/name_f] are just devine!
it is a lil boring. classic yes…but there are proly a lot of [name_f]Jane[/name_f] Peters out there…
plus the flow is off for me, i prefer the longer name first: [name_f]Miriam[/name_f] [name_f]Jane[/name_f] Peters
To me, [name_f]Jane[/name_f] is so forceful and strong - but also lively and sprightly - that it can never be boring. [name_f]Jane[/name_f] Peters sounds like a spirited, smart girl.
I think a “secret” longer or more exotic MN is just the ticket. [name_f]Jane[/name_f] [name_f]Amaryllis[/name_f] or [name_f]Jane[/name_f] [name_f]Cordelia[/name_f] (for instance) feels so different from [name_f]Jane[/name_f] [name_f]Marie[/name_f] or [name_f]Jane[/name_f] [name_f]Nicole[/name_f]. [name_f]Jane[/name_f] [name_f]Dolores[/name_f] is so (wearably) glam, I love it!
[name_f]Jane[/name_f] is far from generic in the first name spot. I agree that spicing it up with a long, unexpected middle name would be fun.
Sorry. For me [name_f]Jane[/name_f] Peters is too dull. There is nothing wrong with the name but there nothing special about it either, and because middle names are generally not given I don’t think it would make a difference. Generally I’m not a fan of superfluous Y’s, but in this case I do think [name_f]Jayne[/name_f] Peters would help liven it up.
I wouldn’t use [name_f]Joan[/name_f]. [name_f]Joan[/name_f] Peters screams 50+ to me.
I think it’s a wonderful choice. I think it’s strong and classic; on-trend but not trendy.
I think it’s fine. [name_f]Jane[/name_f] is positively unexpected nowadays. Although I do love [name_f]Joan[/name_f], too.
You can always give her a more unusual middle name. [name_f]Jane[/name_f] [name_f]Isobel[/name_f] Peters is lovely, and she could go by [name_f]Jane[/name_f]-[name_f]Isobel[/name_f].
If I’m being honest, while [name_f]Jane[/name_f] isn’t exactly common these days, it’s a no-frills sort of name. I like [name_f]Jane[/name_f], but more when paired with an uncommon surname. So with yours, I’d lean toward it being a little boring. A middle name with some zest may help to counteract it though.
It’s too plain for my taste, especially with your last name. I’m one of those people who wonders how the name will work for my girls when and if they get married (and yes, when and if they change their name). I’d be worried, it would become more common if she married a guy with the last name of [name_m]Smith[/name_m]. Most people would tell me I’m crazy though! I do like [name_f]Jane[/name_f] better than [name_f]Joan[/name_f]. And I like [name_f]Jane[/name_f] way better than [name_f]Kylie[/name_f], [name_m]Rilee[/name_m], [name_u]Peyton[/name_u] and all the other horrid trendy girls names that make me cringe for their future selfs having to introduce themselves in a job interview. [name_f]Jane[/name_f] would never have to be ashamed of her name. In the end, it’s really your opinion and your husband’s that matter. Best wishes!
Yes, [name_f]Jane[/name_f] Peters sounds more generic than not, but that’s no reason to forego a name you love.
(I wouldn’t recommend [name_f]Joan[/name_f] as much, because it’s more dated to a certain era than timeless like [name_f]Jane[/name_f].)
Besides, if she chooses to be traditional, [name_f]Jane[/name_f] will spend up to three times more of her life using her married name than she will using her maiden name.
Thanks to everyone who has replied. I won’t officially strike [name_f]Jane[/name_f] from my list quite yet, but despite the mostly positive responses I think I will probably end up going with something a bit more complex (other names on my list include [name_f]Daphne[/name_f], [name_f]Johanna[/name_f], and [name_f]Miriam[/name_f]). I still love [name_f]Jane[/name_f] but I don’t know if I can get past the feeling that it loses some of its brightness when placed next to our last name.