Test Page: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 14:06, 5 August 2018

Testing...

Jay
Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme	1993.06	Jay is documented only as a noun and surname in period; as it's the client's mundane given name, it was submitted under the aegis of Rule II.4. Such submissions, while usually acceptable, can be returned if the name is "obtrusively modern". We find Jay to be obtrusively modern, by virtue of its sound: it sounds like an initial, as in J. P. Morgan, and thus post-period. We might have considered this acceptable as a "bird name", akin to Robin, had we been shown a common pattern of usage that birds were used as given names in period. But we could think of no examples offhand, save Robin; and one can make a good case that the bird's name derived from the given name (a diminutive of Robert) rather than the reverse. Without period examples, Jay must be considered intrusively modern, and unacceptable even under the Legal Name Allowance. (Jay MacPhunn, June, 1993, pg. 23)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Testing...
+{| class="wikitable"
+| colspan="3" |'''Jay'''
+|-
+|Bruce Draconarius of Mistholme
+|1993.06
+|Jay is documented only as a noun and surname in period; as it's the client's mundane given name, it was submitted under the aegis of Rule II.4. Such submissions, while usually acceptable, can be returned if the name is "obtrusively modern". We find Jay to be obtrusively modern, by virtue of its sound: it sounds like an initial, as in J. P. Morgan, and thus post-period.
+We might have considered this acceptable as a "bird name", akin to Robin, had we been shown a common pattern of usage that birds were used as given names in period. But we could think of no examples offhand, save Robin; and one can make a good case that the bird's name derived from the given name (a diminutive of Robert) rather than the reverse. Without period examples, Jay must be considered intrusively modern, and unacceptable even under the Legal Name Allowance. (Jay MacPhunn, June, 1993, pg. 23)
+|}