What is the proper way to denote that a person is known by his/her middle name?
For people who are known by a name which isn't their first name, it is common to write that name in quotes preceding the surname, such as Thomas "Tom" Fudd, or Guy Thomas "Toddy" Nichols.
What is the convention when a person goes by their middle name?
Walter Peter Nobb (AKA Peter Nobb)
Would it be correct to say Walter Peter "Peter" Nobb? That seems redundant. And yet to say Walter "Peter" Nobb gives no indication that Peter is the middle name in addition to being the name the person is known by.
naming-convention
New contributor
add a comment |
For people who are known by a name which isn't their first name, it is common to write that name in quotes preceding the surname, such as Thomas "Tom" Fudd, or Guy Thomas "Toddy" Nichols.
What is the convention when a person goes by their middle name?
Walter Peter Nobb (AKA Peter Nobb)
Would it be correct to say Walter Peter "Peter" Nobb? That seems redundant. And yet to say Walter "Peter" Nobb gives no indication that Peter is the middle name in addition to being the name the person is known by.
naming-convention
New contributor
add a comment |
For people who are known by a name which isn't their first name, it is common to write that name in quotes preceding the surname, such as Thomas "Tom" Fudd, or Guy Thomas "Toddy" Nichols.
What is the convention when a person goes by their middle name?
Walter Peter Nobb (AKA Peter Nobb)
Would it be correct to say Walter Peter "Peter" Nobb? That seems redundant. And yet to say Walter "Peter" Nobb gives no indication that Peter is the middle name in addition to being the name the person is known by.
naming-convention
New contributor
For people who are known by a name which isn't their first name, it is common to write that name in quotes preceding the surname, such as Thomas "Tom" Fudd, or Guy Thomas "Toddy" Nichols.
What is the convention when a person goes by their middle name?
Walter Peter Nobb (AKA Peter Nobb)
Would it be correct to say Walter Peter "Peter" Nobb? That seems redundant. And yet to say Walter "Peter" Nobb gives no indication that Peter is the middle name in addition to being the name the person is known by.
naming-convention
naming-convention
New contributor
New contributor
New contributor
asked Dec 22 at 1:38
al970
111
111
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
So far as I can see, neither the GEDCOM 5.5 nor 5.5.1 specifications have an item that enables one to record which given name is actually used in normal life. That suggests that, with no target to aim for, each program may very well have its own conventions. The software I use, for instance (Family Historian from Calico Pie), has an item "Given Name used" so that where the given name is "Charles Edward", then I can enter "Edward" into "Given Name used". I then print that GNU in brackets (after the full name) in charts. The "Edward" goes into an extension tag on the GEDCOM file, thus:
2 _USED Edward
But that's just what they (and I) do.
I'm sure that I've seen Tony Proctor's underlining used elsewhere but this may tend to be a hand-written thing.
The only other thing is to point out that this is also a real life problem - I think that for English & Welsh probate purposes the request is that this sort of thing is done by supplying multiple names - so if "Charles Edward XXXX" were known as "Edward XXXX" in daily life, then both (full) names should be supplied and the calendar would refer to
"Charles Edward XXXX" also known as "Edward XXXX"
Or similar...
Another thing is to remember that each software displays stuff differently so that what works in one, may not work well in another - Ancestry's on-line trees have alternate names but it's not easy to see that they exist, never mind what the values are.
So - you pays your money and you takes your choice....
If I read your response correctly, you would end up with Walter Peter Nobb [Peter]. Is that right?
– al970
Dec 22 at 13:13
Yes but that's only in the charts and that's entirely my concoction, though no doubt motivated by what I've seen elsewhere. And the Given Name Used is on a separate line below the full name, which somehow seems to make it clearer.
– AdrianB38
Dec 22 at 13:17
add a comment |
It is largely a matter of personal preference, but the convention I have sometimes seen used is to include the "unused" first name in parentheses.
For example, for Walter Peter Nobb who was known as Peter:
(Walter) Peter NOBB
My preference for the purposes of maintaining my family tree database is to record all individuals by their birth names and include such details as to nicknames and preferred names in the notes.
1
I like the form, but a concern would be the rather standard form of using Walter (Mary) Nobb in obituaries to indicate that Mary is the spouse of Walter.
– al970
Dec 22 at 17:19
add a comment |
Whereas a nickname or abbreviated name, might be enclosed in quotes (e.g. Anthony "Tony" Proctor), using a middle name (there may be several to pick from) already has a precedent in Germany. Their "rufname" (or "call name") is the one they choose to be called by. It is often underlined on official documents as it could be the second or third name in the sequence of their given names.
add a comment |
I agree with the answer of @HarryVervet that how you do this:
is largely a matter of personal preference
For example, the way I do it in Ancestry.com where there are fields for:
- First and Middle Name;
- Last Name; and
- Suffix
and for my ancestors, who all seem to have British ancestry, is that I:
- only place their surname in the Last Name field;
- place all remaining names from their baptism/birth records in the First and Middle Name field;
- use the Suffix field for not only suffixes but also their preferred name.
If your Peter Nobb appeared in my tree, he would be recorded as:
- First and Middle Name: Walter Peter
- Last Name: Nobb
- Suffix: "Peter"
If he had been commonly known as "Walt", "Pete" or perhaps "Pedro" then the first two fields would contain the same values (from his baptism/birth record) but the Suffix field would contain those double-quoted preferred names, or nicknames, instead.
If there is no "overriding" preferred name in the Suffix field then my convention is that the first of the names in the First and Middle Name field is how they are believed to have been generally known.
In my tree my great-grandmother Mary Ellen Nettell was known as Nellie Nettell so in my tree she is recorded as:
- First and Middle Name: Mary Ellen
- Last Name: Nettell
- Suffix: "Nellie"
and when I search for her using her nickname of Nellie, she can be found:
As the suffix is printed after the full name, I think you would end up with Walter Peter Nobb, "Peter". Is that right?
– al970
Dec 22 at 13:15
It depends how you or the software chooses to display the fields. For my purposes I never see the comma that you have inserted.
– PolyGeo♦
Dec 22 at 13:33
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "467"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
al970 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgenealogy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f14971%2fwhat-is-the-proper-way-to-denote-that-a-person-is-known-by-his-her-middle-name%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
So far as I can see, neither the GEDCOM 5.5 nor 5.5.1 specifications have an item that enables one to record which given name is actually used in normal life. That suggests that, with no target to aim for, each program may very well have its own conventions. The software I use, for instance (Family Historian from Calico Pie), has an item "Given Name used" so that where the given name is "Charles Edward", then I can enter "Edward" into "Given Name used". I then print that GNU in brackets (after the full name) in charts. The "Edward" goes into an extension tag on the GEDCOM file, thus:
2 _USED Edward
But that's just what they (and I) do.
I'm sure that I've seen Tony Proctor's underlining used elsewhere but this may tend to be a hand-written thing.
The only other thing is to point out that this is also a real life problem - I think that for English & Welsh probate purposes the request is that this sort of thing is done by supplying multiple names - so if "Charles Edward XXXX" were known as "Edward XXXX" in daily life, then both (full) names should be supplied and the calendar would refer to
"Charles Edward XXXX" also known as "Edward XXXX"
Or similar...
Another thing is to remember that each software displays stuff differently so that what works in one, may not work well in another - Ancestry's on-line trees have alternate names but it's not easy to see that they exist, never mind what the values are.
So - you pays your money and you takes your choice....
If I read your response correctly, you would end up with Walter Peter Nobb [Peter]. Is that right?
– al970
Dec 22 at 13:13
Yes but that's only in the charts and that's entirely my concoction, though no doubt motivated by what I've seen elsewhere. And the Given Name Used is on a separate line below the full name, which somehow seems to make it clearer.
– AdrianB38
Dec 22 at 13:17
add a comment |
So far as I can see, neither the GEDCOM 5.5 nor 5.5.1 specifications have an item that enables one to record which given name is actually used in normal life. That suggests that, with no target to aim for, each program may very well have its own conventions. The software I use, for instance (Family Historian from Calico Pie), has an item "Given Name used" so that where the given name is "Charles Edward", then I can enter "Edward" into "Given Name used". I then print that GNU in brackets (after the full name) in charts. The "Edward" goes into an extension tag on the GEDCOM file, thus:
2 _USED Edward
But that's just what they (and I) do.
I'm sure that I've seen Tony Proctor's underlining used elsewhere but this may tend to be a hand-written thing.
The only other thing is to point out that this is also a real life problem - I think that for English & Welsh probate purposes the request is that this sort of thing is done by supplying multiple names - so if "Charles Edward XXXX" were known as "Edward XXXX" in daily life, then both (full) names should be supplied and the calendar would refer to
"Charles Edward XXXX" also known as "Edward XXXX"
Or similar...
Another thing is to remember that each software displays stuff differently so that what works in one, may not work well in another - Ancestry's on-line trees have alternate names but it's not easy to see that they exist, never mind what the values are.
So - you pays your money and you takes your choice....
If I read your response correctly, you would end up with Walter Peter Nobb [Peter]. Is that right?
– al970
Dec 22 at 13:13
Yes but that's only in the charts and that's entirely my concoction, though no doubt motivated by what I've seen elsewhere. And the Given Name Used is on a separate line below the full name, which somehow seems to make it clearer.
– AdrianB38
Dec 22 at 13:17
add a comment |
So far as I can see, neither the GEDCOM 5.5 nor 5.5.1 specifications have an item that enables one to record which given name is actually used in normal life. That suggests that, with no target to aim for, each program may very well have its own conventions. The software I use, for instance (Family Historian from Calico Pie), has an item "Given Name used" so that where the given name is "Charles Edward", then I can enter "Edward" into "Given Name used". I then print that GNU in brackets (after the full name) in charts. The "Edward" goes into an extension tag on the GEDCOM file, thus:
2 _USED Edward
But that's just what they (and I) do.
I'm sure that I've seen Tony Proctor's underlining used elsewhere but this may tend to be a hand-written thing.
The only other thing is to point out that this is also a real life problem - I think that for English & Welsh probate purposes the request is that this sort of thing is done by supplying multiple names - so if "Charles Edward XXXX" were known as "Edward XXXX" in daily life, then both (full) names should be supplied and the calendar would refer to
"Charles Edward XXXX" also known as "Edward XXXX"
Or similar...
Another thing is to remember that each software displays stuff differently so that what works in one, may not work well in another - Ancestry's on-line trees have alternate names but it's not easy to see that they exist, never mind what the values are.
So - you pays your money and you takes your choice....
So far as I can see, neither the GEDCOM 5.5 nor 5.5.1 specifications have an item that enables one to record which given name is actually used in normal life. That suggests that, with no target to aim for, each program may very well have its own conventions. The software I use, for instance (Family Historian from Calico Pie), has an item "Given Name used" so that where the given name is "Charles Edward", then I can enter "Edward" into "Given Name used". I then print that GNU in brackets (after the full name) in charts. The "Edward" goes into an extension tag on the GEDCOM file, thus:
2 _USED Edward
But that's just what they (and I) do.
I'm sure that I've seen Tony Proctor's underlining used elsewhere but this may tend to be a hand-written thing.
The only other thing is to point out that this is also a real life problem - I think that for English & Welsh probate purposes the request is that this sort of thing is done by supplying multiple names - so if "Charles Edward XXXX" were known as "Edward XXXX" in daily life, then both (full) names should be supplied and the calendar would refer to
"Charles Edward XXXX" also known as "Edward XXXX"
Or similar...
Another thing is to remember that each software displays stuff differently so that what works in one, may not work well in another - Ancestry's on-line trees have alternate names but it's not easy to see that they exist, never mind what the values are.
So - you pays your money and you takes your choice....
answered Dec 22 at 11:48
AdrianB38
9,5761634
9,5761634
If I read your response correctly, you would end up with Walter Peter Nobb [Peter]. Is that right?
– al970
Dec 22 at 13:13
Yes but that's only in the charts and that's entirely my concoction, though no doubt motivated by what I've seen elsewhere. And the Given Name Used is on a separate line below the full name, which somehow seems to make it clearer.
– AdrianB38
Dec 22 at 13:17
add a comment |
If I read your response correctly, you would end up with Walter Peter Nobb [Peter]. Is that right?
– al970
Dec 22 at 13:13
Yes but that's only in the charts and that's entirely my concoction, though no doubt motivated by what I've seen elsewhere. And the Given Name Used is on a separate line below the full name, which somehow seems to make it clearer.
– AdrianB38
Dec 22 at 13:17
If I read your response correctly, you would end up with Walter Peter Nobb [Peter]. Is that right?
– al970
Dec 22 at 13:13
If I read your response correctly, you would end up with Walter Peter Nobb [Peter]. Is that right?
– al970
Dec 22 at 13:13
Yes but that's only in the charts and that's entirely my concoction, though no doubt motivated by what I've seen elsewhere. And the Given Name Used is on a separate line below the full name, which somehow seems to make it clearer.
– AdrianB38
Dec 22 at 13:17
Yes but that's only in the charts and that's entirely my concoction, though no doubt motivated by what I've seen elsewhere. And the Given Name Used is on a separate line below the full name, which somehow seems to make it clearer.
– AdrianB38
Dec 22 at 13:17
add a comment |
It is largely a matter of personal preference, but the convention I have sometimes seen used is to include the "unused" first name in parentheses.
For example, for Walter Peter Nobb who was known as Peter:
(Walter) Peter NOBB
My preference for the purposes of maintaining my family tree database is to record all individuals by their birth names and include such details as to nicknames and preferred names in the notes.
1
I like the form, but a concern would be the rather standard form of using Walter (Mary) Nobb in obituaries to indicate that Mary is the spouse of Walter.
– al970
Dec 22 at 17:19
add a comment |
It is largely a matter of personal preference, but the convention I have sometimes seen used is to include the "unused" first name in parentheses.
For example, for Walter Peter Nobb who was known as Peter:
(Walter) Peter NOBB
My preference for the purposes of maintaining my family tree database is to record all individuals by their birth names and include such details as to nicknames and preferred names in the notes.
1
I like the form, but a concern would be the rather standard form of using Walter (Mary) Nobb in obituaries to indicate that Mary is the spouse of Walter.
– al970
Dec 22 at 17:19
add a comment |
It is largely a matter of personal preference, but the convention I have sometimes seen used is to include the "unused" first name in parentheses.
For example, for Walter Peter Nobb who was known as Peter:
(Walter) Peter NOBB
My preference for the purposes of maintaining my family tree database is to record all individuals by their birth names and include such details as to nicknames and preferred names in the notes.
It is largely a matter of personal preference, but the convention I have sometimes seen used is to include the "unused" first name in parentheses.
For example, for Walter Peter Nobb who was known as Peter:
(Walter) Peter NOBB
My preference for the purposes of maintaining my family tree database is to record all individuals by their birth names and include such details as to nicknames and preferred names in the notes.
answered Dec 22 at 5:58
Harry Vervet♦
13.9k42281
13.9k42281
1
I like the form, but a concern would be the rather standard form of using Walter (Mary) Nobb in obituaries to indicate that Mary is the spouse of Walter.
– al970
Dec 22 at 17:19
add a comment |
1
I like the form, but a concern would be the rather standard form of using Walter (Mary) Nobb in obituaries to indicate that Mary is the spouse of Walter.
– al970
Dec 22 at 17:19
1
1
I like the form, but a concern would be the rather standard form of using Walter (Mary) Nobb in obituaries to indicate that Mary is the spouse of Walter.
– al970
Dec 22 at 17:19
I like the form, but a concern would be the rather standard form of using Walter (Mary) Nobb in obituaries to indicate that Mary is the spouse of Walter.
– al970
Dec 22 at 17:19
add a comment |
Whereas a nickname or abbreviated name, might be enclosed in quotes (e.g. Anthony "Tony" Proctor), using a middle name (there may be several to pick from) already has a precedent in Germany. Their "rufname" (or "call name") is the one they choose to be called by. It is often underlined on official documents as it could be the second or third name in the sequence of their given names.
add a comment |
Whereas a nickname or abbreviated name, might be enclosed in quotes (e.g. Anthony "Tony" Proctor), using a middle name (there may be several to pick from) already has a precedent in Germany. Their "rufname" (or "call name") is the one they choose to be called by. It is often underlined on official documents as it could be the second or third name in the sequence of their given names.
add a comment |
Whereas a nickname or abbreviated name, might be enclosed in quotes (e.g. Anthony "Tony" Proctor), using a middle name (there may be several to pick from) already has a precedent in Germany. Their "rufname" (or "call name") is the one they choose to be called by. It is often underlined on official documents as it could be the second or third name in the sequence of their given names.
Whereas a nickname or abbreviated name, might be enclosed in quotes (e.g. Anthony "Tony" Proctor), using a middle name (there may be several to pick from) already has a precedent in Germany. Their "rufname" (or "call name") is the one they choose to be called by. It is often underlined on official documents as it could be the second or third name in the sequence of their given names.
answered Dec 22 at 10:37
ACProctor
4,6921336
4,6921336
add a comment |
add a comment |
I agree with the answer of @HarryVervet that how you do this:
is largely a matter of personal preference
For example, the way I do it in Ancestry.com where there are fields for:
- First and Middle Name;
- Last Name; and
- Suffix
and for my ancestors, who all seem to have British ancestry, is that I:
- only place their surname in the Last Name field;
- place all remaining names from their baptism/birth records in the First and Middle Name field;
- use the Suffix field for not only suffixes but also their preferred name.
If your Peter Nobb appeared in my tree, he would be recorded as:
- First and Middle Name: Walter Peter
- Last Name: Nobb
- Suffix: "Peter"
If he had been commonly known as "Walt", "Pete" or perhaps "Pedro" then the first two fields would contain the same values (from his baptism/birth record) but the Suffix field would contain those double-quoted preferred names, or nicknames, instead.
If there is no "overriding" preferred name in the Suffix field then my convention is that the first of the names in the First and Middle Name field is how they are believed to have been generally known.
In my tree my great-grandmother Mary Ellen Nettell was known as Nellie Nettell so in my tree she is recorded as:
- First and Middle Name: Mary Ellen
- Last Name: Nettell
- Suffix: "Nellie"
and when I search for her using her nickname of Nellie, she can be found:
As the suffix is printed after the full name, I think you would end up with Walter Peter Nobb, "Peter". Is that right?
– al970
Dec 22 at 13:15
It depends how you or the software chooses to display the fields. For my purposes I never see the comma that you have inserted.
– PolyGeo♦
Dec 22 at 13:33
add a comment |
I agree with the answer of @HarryVervet that how you do this:
is largely a matter of personal preference
For example, the way I do it in Ancestry.com where there are fields for:
- First and Middle Name;
- Last Name; and
- Suffix
and for my ancestors, who all seem to have British ancestry, is that I:
- only place their surname in the Last Name field;
- place all remaining names from their baptism/birth records in the First and Middle Name field;
- use the Suffix field for not only suffixes but also their preferred name.
If your Peter Nobb appeared in my tree, he would be recorded as:
- First and Middle Name: Walter Peter
- Last Name: Nobb
- Suffix: "Peter"
If he had been commonly known as "Walt", "Pete" or perhaps "Pedro" then the first two fields would contain the same values (from his baptism/birth record) but the Suffix field would contain those double-quoted preferred names, or nicknames, instead.
If there is no "overriding" preferred name in the Suffix field then my convention is that the first of the names in the First and Middle Name field is how they are believed to have been generally known.
In my tree my great-grandmother Mary Ellen Nettell was known as Nellie Nettell so in my tree she is recorded as:
- First and Middle Name: Mary Ellen
- Last Name: Nettell
- Suffix: "Nellie"
and when I search for her using her nickname of Nellie, she can be found:
As the suffix is printed after the full name, I think you would end up with Walter Peter Nobb, "Peter". Is that right?
– al970
Dec 22 at 13:15
It depends how you or the software chooses to display the fields. For my purposes I never see the comma that you have inserted.
– PolyGeo♦
Dec 22 at 13:33
add a comment |
I agree with the answer of @HarryVervet that how you do this:
is largely a matter of personal preference
For example, the way I do it in Ancestry.com where there are fields for:
- First and Middle Name;
- Last Name; and
- Suffix
and for my ancestors, who all seem to have British ancestry, is that I:
- only place their surname in the Last Name field;
- place all remaining names from their baptism/birth records in the First and Middle Name field;
- use the Suffix field for not only suffixes but also their preferred name.
If your Peter Nobb appeared in my tree, he would be recorded as:
- First and Middle Name: Walter Peter
- Last Name: Nobb
- Suffix: "Peter"
If he had been commonly known as "Walt", "Pete" or perhaps "Pedro" then the first two fields would contain the same values (from his baptism/birth record) but the Suffix field would contain those double-quoted preferred names, or nicknames, instead.
If there is no "overriding" preferred name in the Suffix field then my convention is that the first of the names in the First and Middle Name field is how they are believed to have been generally known.
In my tree my great-grandmother Mary Ellen Nettell was known as Nellie Nettell so in my tree she is recorded as:
- First and Middle Name: Mary Ellen
- Last Name: Nettell
- Suffix: "Nellie"
and when I search for her using her nickname of Nellie, she can be found:
I agree with the answer of @HarryVervet that how you do this:
is largely a matter of personal preference
For example, the way I do it in Ancestry.com where there are fields for:
- First and Middle Name;
- Last Name; and
- Suffix
and for my ancestors, who all seem to have British ancestry, is that I:
- only place their surname in the Last Name field;
- place all remaining names from their baptism/birth records in the First and Middle Name field;
- use the Suffix field for not only suffixes but also their preferred name.
If your Peter Nobb appeared in my tree, he would be recorded as:
- First and Middle Name: Walter Peter
- Last Name: Nobb
- Suffix: "Peter"
If he had been commonly known as "Walt", "Pete" or perhaps "Pedro" then the first two fields would contain the same values (from his baptism/birth record) but the Suffix field would contain those double-quoted preferred names, or nicknames, instead.
If there is no "overriding" preferred name in the Suffix field then my convention is that the first of the names in the First and Middle Name field is how they are believed to have been generally known.
In my tree my great-grandmother Mary Ellen Nettell was known as Nellie Nettell so in my tree she is recorded as:
- First and Middle Name: Mary Ellen
- Last Name: Nettell
- Suffix: "Nellie"
and when I search for her using her nickname of Nellie, she can be found:
answered Dec 22 at 7:40
PolyGeo♦
6,80652049
6,80652049
As the suffix is printed after the full name, I think you would end up with Walter Peter Nobb, "Peter". Is that right?
– al970
Dec 22 at 13:15
It depends how you or the software chooses to display the fields. For my purposes I never see the comma that you have inserted.
– PolyGeo♦
Dec 22 at 13:33
add a comment |
As the suffix is printed after the full name, I think you would end up with Walter Peter Nobb, "Peter". Is that right?
– al970
Dec 22 at 13:15
It depends how you or the software chooses to display the fields. For my purposes I never see the comma that you have inserted.
– PolyGeo♦
Dec 22 at 13:33
As the suffix is printed after the full name, I think you would end up with Walter Peter Nobb, "Peter". Is that right?
– al970
Dec 22 at 13:15
As the suffix is printed after the full name, I think you would end up with Walter Peter Nobb, "Peter". Is that right?
– al970
Dec 22 at 13:15
It depends how you or the software chooses to display the fields. For my purposes I never see the comma that you have inserted.
– PolyGeo♦
Dec 22 at 13:33
It depends how you or the software chooses to display the fields. For my purposes I never see the comma that you have inserted.
– PolyGeo♦
Dec 22 at 13:33
add a comment |
al970 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
al970 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
al970 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
al970 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Genealogy & Family History Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgenealogy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f14971%2fwhat-is-the-proper-way-to-denote-that-a-person-is-known-by-his-her-middle-name%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown