George Duke wrote on Tue, Jan 17, 2017 07:12 PM UTC:
Popularity is more elusive to measure the greater the sample size. A plurality of mere 2% could be the number one when voting among 100 or 150 elements. Take the sample space of Baby Names past century: Names of USA excluding Canada etc.
Fairy Pieces are like baby names in having many members not regarded that differently. Mary at 2% could very well be comparable to four-centuries Centaur(BN) after a survey, that is probable #1 whether at 1 or 2 or 3% all variant pieces arrayed however the CVs widely-authored are configured for enumeration. Already #2 "Patricia" is less than 1%, 0.932%, #10 Sarah 0.593%, but #100 Kathy (perhaps less used Padwar of Jetan counterpart, for example) still a healthy 0.2%, or 1 in 500. Is high-rank Sarah popular and Kathy unpopular? Or Cannon(maybe #10 likewise) highly-regarded and #100 Padwar not, even though there is just a factor of three let's say -- to make estimate correspond to the female names such same-ranked -- in their two different usages within separately-defined CVs fully dis-ambiguated at least as to how their pieces move?
Popularity is more elusive to measure the greater the sample size. A plurality of mere 2% could be the number one when voting among 100 or 150 elements. Take the sample space of Baby Names past century: Names of USA excluding Canada etc.
Fairy Pieces are like baby names in having many members not regarded that differently. Mary at 2% could very well be comparable to four-centuries Centaur(BN) after a survey, that is probable #1 whether at 1 or 2 or 3% all variant pieces arrayed however the CVs widely-authored are configured for enumeration. Already #2 "Patricia" is less than 1%, 0.932%, #10 Sarah 0.593%, but #100 Kathy (perhaps less used Padwar of Jetan counterpart, for example) still a healthy 0.2%, or 1 in 500. Is high-rank Sarah popular and Kathy unpopular? Or Cannon(maybe #10 likewise) highly-regarded and #100 Padwar not, even though there is just a factor of three let's say -- to make estimate correspond to the female names such same-ranked -- in their two different usages within separately-defined CVs fully dis-ambiguated at least as to how their pieces move?