It has never NOT been in the Top 200, since 1880, which is the earliest name data is available for.
It did appear to be heading out the Top 200 just a few years ago, but seems to have had a mini revival during the last three years, for which I have no explanation!
[name_f]Kristin[/name_f] dropped off the top 1000 after 2008, and [name_f]Kristen[/name_f] was #892 last year but is off as well now. It bothered me that [name_f]Kristen[/name_f] was more popular - that’s the male spelling in the original Norwegian!
[name_u]Hillary[/name_u] is a fabulous name, and I have friends who named their daughter [name_u]Hilary[/name_u] last year. I read an article that said statistically, Hillary is the most “poisoned” baby name in US history. Poor [name_u]Hillary[/name_u] - if the world was just, it would be at the top!
Yes, [name_f]Lauren[/name_f] is #134- the lowest it’s been since the 70s. Though strangely, I’ve never known another [name_f]Lauren[/name_f] personally and haven’t met that many either. I’ve known/met a lot of Lauras though, and it’s always ranked lower. (I’m not in the US though, maybe that makes a difference.)
Mine isn’t! Yet [name_f]Bethia[/name_f]'s much more common in the US than in the UK. For the record I’m surprised at how many people have a name only in the top 1000 or not at all - maybe an interest in naming is more particularly sparked when you have an uncommon name yourself? Purely hypothetical, but interesting to ponder!
Of course! [name_m]How[/name_m] could I have forgotten? I was actually recently asked if I was named after [name_u]Meredith[/name_u] [name_u]Grey[/name_u], but I’m almost 15 years older than the show lol