Talk:Jones
 | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Alphabetizing
[edit]Hi. If you add a link please add it in proper alphabetical location (or not). -- Superclear
Common names/unique names
[edit]We need better terms than these; I highly doubt that (for example) there is only one person named Chuck Jones out there, even if there's only one listed on Wikipedia. -- Kazrak 18:04, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Kindly stay away
[edit]Wikipedia adores Red links. Do not remove Red links. Superslum 06:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- If an entry is not notable, it should be removed. Lkjhgfdsa 0 (talk) 04:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Jonah
[edit]" 'Jonah' – a name of Icelandic origins suggesting a Viking connection "
Pardon? Jonah is a Hebrew name. Ordinary Person 01:27, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Origin
[edit]I don't believe the origin of the surname has been pinned down to happening in Wales, last time I did some research into this (about a year ago), there was still dispute about the possibility of it originating from Anglicised Norman names. Regardless of this, it'd be nice if the statement of the origin on this page were cited.
Most likely Welsh
[edit]My grandmother's maiden name was Jones, and she and her family where from Wales, the name must be of an Welsh origin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.246.56 (talk) 23:15, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
are surnames "popular" as such in the same way that given names are or are they just "common" in that they aren't actually chosen? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.60.64.61 (talk) 18:38, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
'J's are in Welsh
[edit]The letter 'J' is actually found in the Welsh language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.246.56 (talk) 19:58, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
- No it isn't. According to Welsh alphabet there is no "J" in the Welsh alphabet. J is "admitted" into Welsh only for the purpose of spelling borrowed (mostly English) foreign words. SpinningSpark 09:48, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yes it clearly is. If something becomes "admitted" into a language for these purposes then it becomes part of the accepted language. Also, I do not think it is necessary to state the so-called "fact" twice in consecutive paragraphs. Remove one of them, please —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.136.82 (talk) 18:46, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Common in US
[edit]Jones is very common in America too, is it not? 4th most common in 1990 in the US, and 5th in 2000. Jones is also the second most common name in Australia. Why are there two articles on this name in Wikipedia, one under Jones and another under Jones (surname)? There is very little difference between the articles.
Popular name
[edit]This edit changed "popular" to "common" on the grounds that it implies surnames are not chosen. I challenge this assertion, the original Welsh patronymic was inherited, not chosen, but the anglisized names (of which Jones is the most common example) were most certainly chosen. Although some correspondence of meaning is usually desired there is usually some choice, eg, Johnes, Johns, Joanes, John, Jonah etc. Having said that, the article is fine with "common" as far as I am concerned. SpinningSpark 09:40, 9 September 2008 (UTC)