Darker cells mean a higher score for this topic on that metric.
LessMore
Last reviewed Sources & creditsMedia creditsMethodology
Quick answers
Did Madison rise because of a film?
Splash (1984) is a well-known English-language case where a mermaid’s name coincided with a later given-name climb in U.S. files. Treat it as a historical illustration, and still check the SSA years.
What about Khaleesi / Daenerys?
Game of Thrones produced a documented spike in some English-language files in the 2010s — a dated media event, not a standing recommendation.
Do athletes move names more than actors?
It depends on the market and the year. Always go file-first, anecdote-second.
Why is Lieberson sceptical?
Because many “celebrity” names were already rising, and similar-sounding names rise without a star.
Should I avoid a celebrity name?
Only if you dislike the association or the spike. There is no moral rule. Fashion will move anyway.
Do K-pop or K-drama names show up in KOSTAT?
Media can influence, but Korean frequencies still need a KOSTAT year. Do not assume a global K-wave #1.
Volatility is high: many small spikes instead of one studio-era wave.
Influencer babies add gossip without adding a statistical office.
Cycles
- Franchise coinage boom — Then a quiet decade.
- Athlete after a tournament — Short attention, local files.
- Royal baby bump — A dated, checkable event.
- Scandal souring — Association reversal.
- Retro star revival — A 1950s actor becomes a 2020s “classic” — still fashion.
Signals
- Aligned release year + file jump — The real signal.
- Lookalike cluster without a star — Lieberson wins.
- Search interest vs registrations — Google is not a birth file.
- KOSTAT vs export fame gap — Scale mismatch signal.
Outlook
- Smaller spikes, more of them — Harder headlines, same method.
- Persistent over-credit — Stars are easy to write about.
- No live baby leaderboard here — Still.
More celebrity, more need for Lieberson, more need for a year stamp.