Message: "No, it's fact that Babynames.com isn't to be trusted"

This is a reply within a larger thread: view the whole thread

No, it's fact that Babynames.com isn't to be trusted

by Miranda (Randee15)

7/29/2005, 2:52 PM

in reply to a message by Cleveland Kent Evans

It's notoriously unreliable, and nobody should go there if they want accurate, etymologically-based meanings. Thus, what I said was perfectly factual.

EDIT: - extra "was", two days after the fact...

Miranda
"You've been downgraded to a class three tropical storm." -- My mother to my father, re: Hurricane Dennis

Proud adopter of 15 punctuation marks; see my profile for their names.

This message was edited 8/1/2005, 2:52 PM

Replies

- Serafina Starstrider +3

7/29/2005, 7:20 PM

Yeah I never have found them to even have a very large data base at all.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
My Favorite Names:

Girls: Sabriel, Serafina, Augustine, Ravenna, Leona, Iona, Fiona, Quintessa, Arianna, Adele (ah-dhe-LEE), Gwenivere, Genevieve, Kathryn, Katerina, Shilia, Catriona, and Keira.

Boys: Keiran, Quinn, Aidan, Vincent, Caden, Killian, Lochlan, Cleon, Xavier, Finley, and Malachi.

- Chrisell +2

7/29/2005, 7:23 PM

It's not so much that their database is small, as that they invent and change meanings whenever they choose. They don't care if it's accurate as long as it's "cute".

♦ Chrisell ♦

All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us. - J.R.R. Tolkien.

- Mike C +1

8/2/2005, 11:42 AM

I think his point is that there are less inflamatory ways to describe the site.

- Cleveland Kent Evans (clevelandkentevans)

8/6/2005, 8:30 AM

Precisely. It is fine to criticize their accuracy, but "crap" is not a word that should be used on a site like this one where people are supposed to be discussing names from an intellectual perspective.

View Message

Replies