I am possibly in the depths of despair. I am pregnant with our second baby…hang in there the despair part is coming…My son is [name]West[/name], and we have selected [name]Wilder[/name] as the name for the baby if it is a boy.
Then it hit me.
[name]Wild[/name] [name]West[/name].
Does anyone else think of that?! PLEEEEASE say NO! [name]Wilder[/name] is THE name and I really cannot imagine finding another that I love even half as much. So what do you think: [name]West[/name] and [name]Wilder[/name]? Ok? Or a no go? (If you say no go we might not be friends anymore… (Half kidding half serious)
I don’t think it’s a huge problem, as in a reason why you absolutely can’t use the name, but I do think it’s something that people will notice and you might be annoyed by it.
If you’re looking for alternatives, how about [name]Wyatt[/name]?
use the name if you love it, but i agree with the post above me - everyone will make the connection. if you can’t live with that, then maybe you should pick another name.
let us know if you are on the market for a new name!
I have to say, it concerns me for sure. [name]West[/name] and [name]Wilder[/name]? I think people will wonder if you are trying to start some mayhem in the neighborhood or something. It’s truly a shame, though, because I love the name [name]Wilder[/name], so very much! Maybe if it was something like [name]Jesse[/name] ([name]James[/name], as in the [name]Wild[/name] [name]West[/name]) or [name]Wolfe[/name], still renegade and cool, it wouldn’t be a problem, but I feel like this is a problem. Can [name]Wilder[/name] work as a middle name and you can pull it out as a nickname when he’s being particularly mischievous? Oh, I’m so sorry!
For me it would not be a deal breaker…but as previous posters have said if it would annoy you that people might point it out thats a different matter. I think it helps that your 1st is [name]West[/name] and 2nd [name]Wilder[/name] it’s less obvious that way. [name]Will[/name] they go by nn at all?
People will probably notice, but I don’t think it’s a big deal. I actually think it’s cute and the names are great together. I think it would be worse if it were [name]Wilder[/name] and [name]West[/name], but [name]West[/name] and [name]Wilder[/name] wouldn’t make me think of the wild west.
I really wouldn’t do it. I think it’s sort of silly; what if you’re calling them “[name]Wilder[/name], [name]West[/name]! Come to dinner!” or something? You’ll get a lot of strange looks, and the majority of people will think it was purposely done to look ‘clever’ or something. Sorry!
What about [name]William[/name] nn [name]Wilder[/name]?
Well the full name would be [name]Willoughby[/name] [name]Wilder[/name] [name]Polk[/name] French. [name]Willoughby[/name] is my maiden name, [name]Polk[/name] is a big family name, and I just like the alliteration of the W’s.
I thought about [name]Wyatt[/name] but that seems too common (here in [name]Texas[/name]). I also thought of [name]Wilder[/name] as a nn for [name]Willoughby[/name], but I just couldn’t find a name to stick in the [name]Wilder[/name] position…
I’ve gone through [name]Duke[/name], [name]Reeves[/name], [name]Rhett[/name], [name]Rafe[/name], [name]Roscoe[/name], [name]Rigby[/name], [name]Rufus[/name] (yeah, love those R’s!), Marcomir and Ferreolus are neat family names…nothing feels right! Frustrating. I just [name]LOVE[/name] [name]Wilder[/name].
Oh! I remember [name]Willoughby[/name] [name]Wilder[/name] [name]Polk[/name] now! But, I guess it never occurred to me that you’d call him [name]Wilder[/name]. What about [name]Wiley[/name] as a nickname - for both [name]Willoughby[/name] and [name]Wilder[/name]? [name]West[/name] and [name]Wiley[/name]? It gives a slight nod to the whole [name]Wild[/name] [name]West[/name] thing without being as obvious (at least obvious to me)…
I thought about [name]Wills[/name] as a nn for both [name]Willoughby[/name] and [name]Wilder[/name], but I just keep going back to [name]Wilder[/name]. I tell ya that name is like velcro to me!
I don’t think this actually makes any difference from the first name you had selected. I think the issue is that you’re going to CALL him [name]Wilder[/name] and that’s where your concern with [name]Wild[/name] [name]West[/name] comes in; it doesn’t really matter what his formal name is. If you are set on calling him [name]Wilder[/name], you might as well include [name]Wilder[/name] in his formal name ([name]Willoughby[/name] [name]Wilder[/name] [name]Polk[/name] really is a great name, after all!). But if you can find something else to call him that you love as much as [name]Wilder[/name] but would avoid the [name]Wild[/name] [name]West[/name] issue, then you should consider changing his formal name accordingly.
I love [name]West[/name] and [name]Wilder[/name]! My two cents: You have to go with what your heart is telling you to do. It seems quite clear to me that you believe “[name]Wilder[/name]” to be THE name. I find that our responsibility as parents/namers-of-our-children, comes down more to finding the right name for our individual children than finding the name that “fits perfectly” in a sibset. Almost every time in the span of his life that your son will be spoken to/of, he’ll be referred to as “[name]Wilder[/name]”, not “[name]Wilder[/name], brother of [name]West[/name]”.
In addition, I didn’t necessarily think of “[name]Wild[/name] [name]West[/name]” when I first heard the names together. It would be different if you had named them in reverse order: [name]Wilder[/name] and [name]West[/name]. Good luck, Frenchie!
Oh, I [name]LOVE[/name] the suggestion of [name]Archer[/name] with [name]West[/name]! Good call, @wagnerem! [name]Willoughby[/name] [name]Archer[/name] [name]Polk[/name] sounds great, too…
(Half kidding half serious)
