View Message

[Opinions] Kelsey
WDYT of Kelsey, for a girl? **Starfish and coffee, maple syrup and jam/Butterscotch clouds, a tangerine, and a side order of ham**
Archived Thread - replies disabled
vote up1

Replies

It feels trendy overall, with the K and the -ey ending and the fact that it's unisex at least in theory, and I generally do not like modern-sounding unisex names, but Kelsey is one of the exceptions. I also like Chelsea, Kelly and Shelley. Would never use it on a child, and I don't think it ages well, but I think it sounds nice and makes me think of a nice person, even though I don't know anyone named Kelsey. It just has a bit of a friendly feel to me for some reason.
vote up1
It’s okay — it’s cute. I like the spelling Kelsea. But I prefer Chelsea at the end of the day.
vote up1
Meh. As surnames on girls go, it's one of the better, more feminine-sounding ones. So as surnames on girls go, there are far worse ones. Yet it was quite the flash-in-the-pan, and so is becoming dated at a quicker rate than most other names.
vote up1
I wouldn’t use it, but I like trendy-ish names starting with K. It might become very dated, though.
vote up1
I just think of the restaurant chain.
vote up1
Same outdated vibe as Brittany, Stefanie and Lisanot the worst but not a love

This message was edited 3/11/2020, 9:09 PM

vote up1
It's nice. Not a fave but if I were a writer, I'd use it for a likeable character.
It's like a riff on Kelly. Kelly, Kelsey, Kacey, Kayley, Kenzie, Kylie, Kinsley... all members of a name family, kinda.
I think it'd be cooler to see it on a guy, but there's not much hope of that.
vote up1
It mainly just sounds like a trendy but not mega popular name, somewhere between Shelley / Kelly and Keira / Chloe / Kylie / Kennedy in age.I know 3, who are my age, late 20s and 30.
That's less than the Brittanys or Ashleys I've met, more than the Janelles or Cassidys, about the same as Crystal / Krystal.It's pleasant enough, though not something I'd consider using for a kid ever.

This message was edited 3/11/2020, 6:44 PM

vote up1
It’s okay, but dated. Side note, am I the only one who thinks it’s strange Chelsea was consistently more popular named Kelsey? I know way more people named Kelsey and it sounds more “legitimate” while Chelsea sounds like a knock off.
vote up1
I have the opposite impression - Kelsey seems more like a knockoff of Chelsea, to me. Like Chelsea was too place-y so they went with the more familiarly Kelly-like, and therefore safer, Kelsey.
I think Chelsea seems more dated now, though.
vote up1
If spelling variations of Kelsey are combined, I'd guess it was more popular than Chelsea.And I think Chelsea appealed as a famous kid's name and as a placename, while Kelsey has more of a surname-as-first-name appeal.

This message was edited 3/11/2020, 6:44 PM

vote up1
its ok
vote up1
Love.
I actually have two nieces with this name, one on my side of the family and one on my husbands side. It’s adorable.
vote up1
It's very dated to me, but I don't dislike it. Kels is a cute nickname, and most Kelseys I knew were that at least some of the time. Definitely better than Chelsea.
vote up1