What are your thoughts on [name_m]Nicholas[/name_m], both as a name in general, and in the context of how well it seems to fit in with my other favorites (see signature). I know it’s a more common classic, but can it hold its own, with a slightly less used nn of [name_u]Nico[/name_u]?
To dress it up a bit, I was thinking of a more offbeat MN:
I prefer [name_u]Nico[/name_u] on it’s on to be completely honest but it’s okay as a nickname for [name_m]Nicholas[/name_m] too. I think I’d be more drawn to meet a [name_m]Nicholas[/name_m] with the nickname of [name_u]Nico[/name_u] because all of the ones I know personally either get called “[name_u]Nick[/name_u]”, “[name_u]Nicky[/name_u]” or “[name_m]Cole[/name_m]”.
I think out of your list, the one I like the most is [name_m]Nicholas[/name_m] [name_m]Bodhi[/name_m]. [name_m]Nicholas[/name_m] [name_m]Clement[/name_m] is okay but is a bit too old sounding for me. It also doesn’t fit too well in your signature as most of the classic names have a spark name that gives them some more light. I love the name [name_m]Lorcan[/name_m] but [name_m]Nicholas[/name_m] [name_m]Lorcan[/name_m] is a mouthful with the “las Lor” part. I’m just not too fond of [name_m]Ragnar[/name_m] but the flow isn’t bad.
[name_m]Nicholas[/name_m] with nn [name_u]Nico[/name_u] has been a longterm favourite of mine. Classic and cool I think. I like [name_m]Clement[/name_m], [name_m]Lorcan[/name_m] and [name_m]Ragnar[/name_m] on their own; with [name_m]Nicholas[/name_m] I think both [name_m]Lorcan[/name_m] and [name_m]Ragnar[/name_m] work really well. [name_m]Bodhi[/name_m] does nothing for me and doesn’t enhance [name_m]Nicholas[/name_m] for me. I like [name_m]Nicholas[/name_m] [name_m]Lorcan[/name_m]/[name_m]Ragnar[/name_m] well with the names in your signature.
