What do you think are the Sharon/Tracy/Michelle names of this generation???

The DCs have all had Rachels, Sarahs, Catherines (Kate or Katie) and Margarets (Maggie) in their classes. DD4 has 3 Rachels and 2 Sarahs in her class. One of the Sarahs is a twin of one of the Rachels. In DS's class one of the 3 Rachels had an older sister named Sarah. DD1's class had twins Maggie and Katie and several others. Must be something in the water.

I have one DD with a very popular name and four whose names haven't been in the top 100 for ages, if ever. Not a worry for me either way. They are family names that meant a lot to me when I was naming them.

I don't get name snobbery. I have one DS with a very popular name, and one with a more unusual name. I love both names, and could not give a shiny shit what someone else thinks of them

At 46 I know of only one other person of my age with my name, however in the 80's it suddenly became very popular, likewise I had 5 Sarah's and 3 Catherine's in my class at school and now they are hardly ever used.

Both of my sons have names that are now very popular - they weren't when we named them it's just that everybody has realised what exceptionally good taste we have

Also not everyone wants to look to the royal family for inspiration. The latest addition to the royal family is little Savannah. I wonder what Lizzie thought of that choice of name?

Sharon isn't a name in the Bible. It's a place. I was only taken up as a human name much later.

Sharon is a biblical name.

"I think classic, trad royal and Biblical names would never fall into this category even when they are the most frequently given" - spot on Edith.

iirc fat slags from viz were sandra and tracey

sharon and tracey from birds of a feather

what you are trying to predict is names which are going to take on a horrible class-based caricature

That was not what the OP said, and it hasn't featured in the majority of subsequent posts either.

Personally I suspect the cutesy names like Daisy, Poppy, Milly, Molly etc will start to look very dated in a decade or two. It's difficult to predict these things though!

Cutesy names already feel so overdone. I wouldn't be surprised if the tide starts turning sooner rather than later and 'cleaner' sounding names start to become more popular.

Ephiny. I think almost all names end up looking dated. I'm almost 40 and from my generation the only name that is still popular now is Lucy. Lots of other names that are perfectly nice and unchavvy are still of their time, e.g Stephen, Andrew, Mark, Helen, Caroline and Amanda.

Personally I suspect the cutesy names like Daisy, Poppy, Milly, Molly etc will start to look very dated in a decade or two. It's difficult to predict these things though!

Emmyloo. Why should names have to be original?

You say that lots of names listed here aren't original but what about more traditional names such as Anna, Katherine, Henry and Thomas. They are all perfectly nice names but still lacking in originality.

I'm 30 and I remember 2 Trac(e)y's and a Sharon at my school (have met a Sharran of my age as well). They were becoming less popular though, it was more Sarah, Claire, Louise, Jennifer etc.

I do think Sharon is a lovely name though, no idea why people seem to dislike it so much. It's not even overly popular now. I'd definitely consider using it.

Have to agree, I think that this type of thread is just a bit of a shame. I just scanned through it all thinking I hope my children's names aren't on this. They aren't although my daughters name could quite easily have turned up because it is often thrown up as 'too popular'.

It is not possible to really predict the next 'Sharon' and 'Tracey', because what you are trying to predict is names which are going to take on a horrible class-based caricature. Nobody would want their child's name to be a 'Sharon' or a 'Tracey', and so the fact that the names of people's children are being thrown around so casually is, as far as I'm concerned, unkind. It is the same level of unthinking unkindness as the thread a few days ago asking about the 'horrible names' from graveyards.

I do realise that the thread was not meant to be unkind, but taking something that parents have given to the children and labelling it as 'chavy' or 'Sharon-esq' is basically unkind, and unnecessary.

I'll get off my high horse now.

I think this is to do both with frequency of use in a particular generation, and lack of use before and after. So it's a bit difficult to predict which will be in a time-limited bulge until it over for a while.

I think classic, trad royal and Biblical names would never fall into this category even when they are the most frequently given; eg if you add standard variants together, the top 2 for 2010 were Sophie and Evie - I think Sophie is immune IYSWIM, but Evie might prove to be such. The other girls name I think may be a candidate is Ruby. For boys, perhaps Finn and Archie.

It's not a criticism of the names, BTW, they are frequently used because so many people think they are lovely.

This is a really snobby thread.

It isn't a snobby thread at all. It's just about names that are becoming overused and "of their time". Nobody's said anything nasty, unless I'm missing something

I think Ruby, Lily and Isabella for girls and Alfie, Harry and Callum will all end up being those very common names that every other kid in school seems to have.

In my day (70s baby) it was Claire, Hannah, Nicola, Rachel and Rebecca for girls and Paul, Mark, Steven and Chris for boys. I've also never met a Sharon the same age as me and only knew one Tracey the whole time I was at school. I think they're more 60s than 70s names tbh.

Amelie, Evie, Scarlett, Ava, Grace, Isla, maybe some of the old lady names.

Alfie, Kaydon etc.

All got fashionable very quickly.

Tunip, I think the name Zac/Zak was made popular through High School Musical and perhaps, more lately, Elton John.

(I personally dislike the sound of Zac/Zak as it sounds harsh and somehow unfinished... it also sounds silly in other languages imo).

emmyloo2, if you look outside the top 100 names (on ONS list) you'll find lots and lots of classic normal names, they may just not be 'trendy'.

Names that I currently love include Markus, Quentin, Fabian, Raphael and for girls Antonia, Sarah, Seraphina and Alexandra. Now they may not be to everyones' taste, but that's good as otherwise everyone would choose them .

see I don't think people are consciously following trends. Friends of mine who called their ds Zac thought it was an original and unusual name, it's just that parents all over the country were having exactly the same idea at the same time.

I gave my dcs names that I thought were fairly boring, I didn't try to be original, but somehow they are all the only ones in the school with their names.

I'm surprised that Jeremy is not that popular, given the number of media Jeremys around. Clarkson, Paxman, Kyle, Vine .... they may be marmite but they do vary! Jeremy is a good traditional name though, can be shortened to Jerry or Jem, and has never been in or out of fashion in a big way.

Sonniebonnie, I think you are bang on with your overused names. Everytime I hear of another child named one of these names it makes my teeth curl. Not because they aren't nice names, they are, but they are everywhere and they lack originality.

However, then my question is - what names are nice but still original? I really struggle with boy's names in particular. It is hard to find that balance between something nice, not made up, not overused but then not too try hard. IYSWIM? What boy's names do you like?

Some names become 'fashionable' very quickly as everyone follows the trend and it is these names that become ubiquitous and overused and, as a result, start to date as people tire of them. This has nothing to do with class or whether a name is 'chav' or 'posh'. It has to do with the fact that many people like to follow trends rather than choose stylish, different names for their children. I love that my name is quite rarely used and don't think it has ever been in the top 100 in any country (that I know of).

Overused names imo include Evie/Eve/Eva/Ava, Milly, Tilly, Ruby, Lily, Lola and for boys Alfie/Albie/Archie/Ollie, Charlie, Jack, Oscar, Zak etc - there are just too many of them around imo!

It's Lilly/Eva/Madison/Lexi/Alfie/Fin(lay) which annoy me most at the moment.
Lilly/Eva/Finlay because they're massively popular and every second baby seems to be called one of these, and Madison/Lexi/Alfie because I think they'll be really dated.

Actually, as will Darcy, of which I know 3 aged around 2, and Mileywhich isn't even a real name imo