Baby names that re-emerged most impressively in the U.S. data, 1882 to today

young leaves

We know which names debuted most impressively in the U.S. baby name data, but what about the baby names that returned most impressively? That is, the names that re-emerged in the data (after an absence of at least one year) with the highest number of babies?

Below are the most popular re-emerging names for every single year on record, after the second.

Here’s the format: Girl names are on the left, boy names are on the right, and the numbers represent single-year usage (following an absence). In 1971, for instance, the girl name Devonia returned to the data with 22 babies, and the boy name Idris returned to the data with 21 babies.

  • 1882: Harry, 14; Saul, 15
  • 1883: Luna, 17; Anna, 20
  • 1884: Eulalia & Margaretta, 15; Billie, 18
  • 1885: Philomene, 13; Kirby & Lamar, 14
  • 1886: Ammie, Attie, Drusilla, Eulalia & Narcissus, 14; Emmit & Ivy, 15
  • 1887: Idell, 12; Benjaman, 13
  • 1888: Guadalupe, 18; Hunter, 16
  • 1889: Leonie, 21; Leander, 22
  • 1890: Delila, Hildegarde & Sabra, 17; Buford, Loyal & Pleasant, 13
  • 1891: Marvel, 15; Roswell, 20
  • 1892: Jennette, 16; Vernie, 15
  • 1893: Byrd & Corda, 16; Salvatore, 14
  • 1894: Mozelle, 15; Essie, 18
  • 1895: Consuelo, 16; Adelard, 16
  • 1896: Dorris, 17; Bertrand & Hilliard, 16
  • 1897: Coletta & Marilla, 13; Gale, Harve & Odell, 13
  • 1898: Vlasta, 16; Oakley, 16
  • 1899: Gwen & Velda, 15; Ivory, 14
  • 1900: Ammie, 21; Lonzo, 22
  • 1901: Alvera, 17; Ernesto, 11
  • 1902: Hermine, 17; Junious, 20
  • 1903: Genie, 17: Lesley, 17
  • 1904: Laurel & Santa, 16; Caesar, 15
  • 1905: Ellar, 15; Cicero & Quincy, 15
  • 1906: Osa, 18; Craig & Tracy, 16
  • 1907: Joanne, 19; Gale, 15
  • 1908: Merna, 18; Andres, 19
  • 1909: Aili, 22; Loy, 22
  • 1910: Corean, 21; Lou, 18
  • 1911: Aune, 17; Ozie, 17
  • 1912: Veryl, 21; Arvin, 21
  • 1913: Loise, 25; Magnus, 15
  • 1914: Rema, 23; Elio, 18
  • 1915: Alleyne & Cledith, 20; Reyes, 24
  • 1916: Ercelle & Fayette, 14; Pleas, 25
  • 1917: Lowell, Mazelle & Patria, 16; Woodruff, 18
  • 1918: Victory, 78; Everitt, 19
  • 1919: Lanell, 16; Olney, 21
  • 1920: Iline & Keitha, 18; Heath, 19
  • 1921: Gilberte & Jacklyn, 16; Donold, 16
  • 1922: Basilia & Glayds, 15; Jw, 17
  • 1923: Marvene, 18; Silvestre, 19
  • 1924: Willadeen, 35; Delno, 19
  • 1925: Noralee, 20; Primitivo, 16
  • 1926: Sondra, 20; Torao, 27
  • 1927: Elga & Lindy, 27; Shoji, 81
  • 1928: Remona, 22; Windle, 17
  • 1929: Darla, 19; Davy, 25
  • 1930: Evalene, 17; Anastasio, 17
  • 1931: Marilyne, 17; Meliton, 15
  • 1932: Maribelle & Wynne, 16; Jacqueline, 18
  • 1933: Sheryl, 24; Lanny, 24
  • 1934: Carolynne & Viona, 15; Filiberto, 20
  • 1935: Vanessa, 32; Kenley, 29
  • 1936: Ardene & Lucienne, 18; Domenico, 15
  • 1937: Nadeen, 19; Lavell, 19
  • 1938: Josette, 44; Bertil & Jerol, 18
  • 1939: Charmayne, 18; Wilborn, 15

(The Social Security Administration’s baby name data isn’t perfect, but it does get a lot more accurate starting in the late 1930s because, according to the SSA, “many people born before 1937 never applied for a Social Security card, so their names are not included in our data.”)

  • 1940: Wendell, 25; Wilkie, 61
  • 1941: Aloma, 47; Maximo, 16
  • 1942: Victory, 51; Corey, 27
  • 1943: Corliss, 44; Amando & Cheryl, 16
  • 1944: Drenda, 50; Ruperto, 16
  • 1945: Drena, 37; Arie, 16
  • 1946: Cherylene, 56; Cliffton, 17
  • 1947: Asenath, 32; Baltazar, 20
  • 1948: Valli, 45; Carley, 15
  • 1949: Lark, 66; Buel, Dennison & Nehemiah, 18
  • 1950: Jasmine, 24; Jory, 52
  • 1951: Vendetta, 48; Alfonzia, Clell, Rondy, Ulysee & Vander, 15
  • 1952: Whitney, 20; Adlai, 40
  • 1953: Lugene, 30; Kervin, 18
  • 1954: Jyl, 80; Rahn, 66
  • 1955: Danni, 49; Teri, 17
  • 1956: Kirsti & Skye, 29; Timonthy, 21
  • 1957: Tammara, 38; Creed, 20
  • 1958: Elfreda, 33; Yancy, 24
  • 1959: Torrie, 42; Kym, 41
  • 1960: Pollyanna, 21; Armon & Delray, 20
  • 1961: Marnita, 145; Cord, 45
  • 1962: Anetta & Colinda, 18; Buckley, 18
  • 1963: Michaelann, 30; Georgie & Jerrod, 19
  • 1964: Djuana, 190; Destry, 149
  • 1965: Virna, 38; Horatio, 17
  • 1966: Tamatha, 222; Trevin, 21
  • 1967: Millette, 68; Arnel, Keary, Ky & Ricco, 15
  • 1968: Neely, 40; Griffith, Kacy & Troyce, 16
  • 1969: Francelia, 23; Darrius, 18
  • 1970: Telisha & Zenja, 26; Germaine, 29
  • 1971: Devonia, 22; Idris, 21
  • 1972: Contina, 209; Keelan, 20
  • 1973: Shenika, 33; Bram, 19
  • 1974: Seandra, 31; Reuven, 18
  • 1975: Mandee, 74; Jermale, 19
  • 1976: Niya, 97; Askia, 21
  • 1977: Kizzie, 286; Kenta, 48
  • 1978: Kylene, 88; Kodi, 41
  • 1979: Ranada, 37; Emmet, 19
  • 1980: Hanni, 34; Lando, 25
  • 1981: Jennilee, 37; Tristen, 21
  • 1982: Terran, 27; Ryne, 31
  • 1983: Yomaira, 45; Drue, 16
  • 1984: Leonela, 46; Catlin, 57
  • 1985: Sharda, 70; Justn, 23
  • 1986: Faren, 85; Adison, 21
  • 1987: Conchetta, 42; Najee, 50
  • 1988: Brogan, 36; Nikko, 59
  • 1989: Kyara, 65; Rishawn, 42
  • 1990: Tichina, 25; Telvin, 47
  • 1991: Bronte, 48; Dilon, 21
  • 1992: Oneisha, 39; Levonte, 32
  • 1993: Amairany, 41; Adonnis, 23
  • 1994: Marimar, 101; Corliss, 22
  • 1995: Shatasha, 26; Tryston, 42
  • 1996: Karrington, 34; Tysheem, 20
  • 1997: Neyda, 35; Voshon, 32
  • 1998: Arrion, 29; Amere, 29
  • 1999: Karyme, 40; Neo, 24
  • 2000: Laisa, 36; Perrion, 41
  • 2001: Torrance, 40; Andrik, 46
  • 2002: Naydelin, 58; Bode, 131
  • 2003: Princesa, 70; Anden, 41
  • 2004: Jenascia, 70; Cabot, 29
  • 2005: Jolette, 258; Greco, 40
  • 2006: Akeelah, 403; Corde, 51
  • 2007: Ambrielle, 46; Osmel, 29
  • 2008: Allysson, 61; Rohaan, 18
  • 2009: Ailea, 57; Kipton, 60
  • 2010: Solara, 40; Dyland, 67
  • 2011: Harnoor, 24; Dakhari, 18
  • 2012: Hareem, 54; Lio & Wayden, 19
  • 2013: Tahiry, 112; Zylen, 27
  • 2014: Yazaira, 42; Alyan, 22
  • 2015: Pihu, 19; Jonael, 232
  • 2016: Yurani, 97; Jru, 31
  • 2017: Brennley, 56; Noriel, 50
  • 2018: Roselyne, 87; Torryn, 31
  • 2019: Yameli, 49; Amyas, 21
  • 2020: Elleri, 34; Dutton, 27
  • 2021: Josiane, 41; Elkin, 21
  • 2022: Thena, 25; Kymeir, 23

I’ve already written about some of these names, and I’ll write about others in the future. In the meantime, feel free to beat me to it! Leave a comment and let us know what popularized Jory in 1950, or Marnita in 1961, or Catlin in 1984…

Source: SSA

Image: Adapted from First leaves Novosibirsk Siberia 24.04.2012 by Mikhail Koninin under CC BY 2.0.

Interesting one-hit wonder names in the U.S. baby name data

single flower

They came, they went, and they never came back!

These baby names are one-hit wonders in the U.S. baby name data. That is, they’ve only popped up once, ever, in the entire dataset of U.S. baby names (which accounts for all names given to at least 5 U.S. babies per year since 1880).

There are thousands of one-hit wonders in the dataset, but the names below have interesting stories behind their single appearance, so these are the one-hits I’m writing specific posts about. Just click on a name to read more.

2020s

  • 2020: Jexi

2010s

2000s

1990s

1980s

1970s

1960s

1950s

1940s

1930s

1920s

1910s

1900s

  • (none yet)

1890s

As I discover (and write about) more one-hit wonders in the data, I’ll add the names/links to this page. In the meanwhile, do you have any favorite one-hit wonder baby names?

Image: Adapted from Solitary Poppy by Andy Beecroft under CC BY-SA 2.0.

[Latest update: Apr. 2024]

Baby names that fell the fastest in the U.S. data, 1881 to today (absolute decrease)

fallen leaves

A couple of weeks a go we checked out the list of top raw-number rises in the U.S. baby name data, so today let’s balance things out with the list of top raw-number drops.

Just remember that the SSA data doesn’t become very accurate until the mid-to-late 20th century, so many of the numbers below don’t reflect reality all that well.

Same format as usual: Girl names on the left, boy names on the right. Numbers represent single-year decreases in usage. From 1880 to 1881, for instance, usage of the girl name Mary dropped by 146 babies and usage of the boy name William dropped by 1,008 babies.

  • 1881: Mary, -146; William, -1,008
  • 1882: Lulu, -34; Garfield, -78
  • 1883: Mary, -136; William, -911
  • 1884: Mina, -33; Albert, -61
  • 1885: Sarah, -94; William, -853
  • 1886: Nancy, -35; Grover, -361
  • 1887: Minnie, -157; John, -916
  • 1888: Dorothea, -24; Rudolph, -17
  • 1889: Emma, -203; William, -933
  • 1890: Mollie, -53; William, -278
  • 1891: Mary, -375; John, -821
  • 1892: Jennie, -26; Enoch & Irving, -16 each (tie)
  • 1893: Mary, -390; John, -990
  • 1894: Ruth, -286; Grover, -171
  • 1895: Laura, -87; Charles, -155
  • 1896: Jessie, -197; John, -182
  • 1897: Anna, -431; John, -589
  • 1898: Sophie, -49; Hobart, -63
  • 1899: Mary, -1,234; William, -1,314
  • 1900: Manila, -24; Dewey, -154
  • 1901: Mary, -3,572; John, -2,931
  • 1902: Sophie, -45; Manuel, -32
  • 1903: Mary, -211; William, -305
  • 1904: Lillie, -121; Leo, -83
  • 1905: Florence, -94; Alton, -138
  • 1906: Minnie, -173; Theodore, -146
  • 1907: Bessie & Alice, -85 each (tie); Austin, -27
  • 1908: Evelyn, -178; Theodore, -69
  • 1909: Mae, -154; Ernest, -115
  • 1910: Allie, -35; Delmar & Bruce, -24 each (tie)
  • 1911: Annie, -220; Willie, -405
  • 1912: Dessie, -20; Lawyer & Blas, -12 each (tie)
  • 1913: Carrie, -62; Emerson, -28
  • 1914: Tomasa, -27; Woodrow, -547
  • 1915: Juana, -32; Kermit, -79
  • 1916: Mollie, -88; Willard, -476
  • 1917: Edna, -204; Woodrow, -239
  • 1918: Rose, -215; Frederick, -103
  • 1919: Helen, -2,447; John, -3,029
  • 1920: Sophie, -234; Woodrow, -1,033
  • 1921: Gertrude, -449; Willie, -391
  • 1922: Helen, -2,314; Warren, -3,315
  • 1923: Helen, -1,017; George, -321
  • 1924: Elizabeth, -512; Warren, -1,231
  • 1925: Mary, -2,910; John, -1,878
  • 1926: Mary, -2,773; William, -1,358
  • 1927: Helen, -1,582; William, -479
  • 1928: Mary, -3,756; William, -2,360
  • 1929: Mary, -3,361; John, -1,652
  • 1930: Ruth, -1,079; Herbert, -2,187
  • 1931: Dorothy, -3,884; John, -4,026
  • 1932: Betty, -1,688; Robert, -1,255
  • 1933: Mary, -4,381; Robert, -5,052
  • 1934: Dorothy, -761; Franklin, -1,209
  • 1935: Betty, -2,408; Franklin, -1,543
  • 1936: Shirley, -7,202; Donald, -1,025
  • 1937: Shirley, -8,337; Donald, -771
  • 1938: Shirley, -3,048; Donald, -1,207
  • 1939: Shirley, -3,320; Robert, -2,630

(From the SSA: “Note that many people born before 1937 never applied for a Social Security card, so their names are not included in our data.”)

  • 1940: Shirley, -2,573; Donald, -962
  • 1941: Betty, -1,172; Wendell, -533
  • 1942: Deanna, -408; Billy, -352
  • 1943: Carole, -1,900; Douglas, -3,001
  • 1944: Barbara, -4,242; Robert, -4,008
  • 1945: Mary, -3,184; James, -2,497
  • 1946: Victoria, -280; Victor, -492
    • Top 5 boy-name drops of ’46, in order: Victor, Truman, Franklin, Delano, Roosevelt/Homer (tie)
  • 1947: Carole, -793; Richard, -369
  • 1948: Patricia, -5,144; Richard, -7,570
  • 1949: Linda, -5,192; Ronald, -2,026
  • 1950: Linda, -10,549; John, -1,642
  • 1951: Linda, -6,553; Larry, -1,016
  • 1952: Linda, -6,808; Larry, -2,224
  • 1953: Linda, -5,819; Larry, -3,081
  • 1954: Linda, -5,884; Dennis, -2,860
  • 1955: Mary, -4,830; Gary, -3,499
  • 1956: Deborah, -4,476; David, -4,588
  • 1957: Deborah, -7,778; Gary, -2,286
  • 1958: Cynthia, -8,311; James, -5,502
  • 1959: Debra, -4,166; Michael, -5,209
  • 1960: Debra, -4,626; Richard, -3,619
  • 1961: Donna, -5,468; Richard, -2,432
  • 1962: Mary, -4,163; Mark, -4,234
  • 1963: Linda, -3,754; Mark, -4,150
  • 1964: Lori, -5,280; Mark, -4,073
  • 1965: Mary, -6,709; John, -10,972
  • 1966: Karen, -7,431; John, -6,519
  • 1967: Lisa, -4,483; James, -3,495
  • 1968: Mary, -3,592; David, -3,058
  • 1969: Lisa, -4,494; Timothy, -3,153
  • 1970: Lisa, -6,077; David, -1,953
  • 1971: Lisa, -6,053; David, -8,650
  • 1972: Lisa, -5,357; John, -8,340
  • 1973: Lisa, -4,883; David, -5,267
  • 1974: Lisa, -2,889; Robert, -1,681
  • 1975: Jennifer, -4,926; Brian, -3,864
  • 1976: Michelle, -3,116; Scott, -1,571
  • 1977: Amy, -4,613; Scott, -1,541
  • 1978: Amy, -3,509; Jason, -4,027
  • 1979: Kelly, -1,686; Kevin, -1,373
  • 1980: Melissa, -2,420; Jason, -2,203
  • 1981: Melissa, -3,623; Jason, -6,268
  • 1982: Brooke, -2,183; Jeremy, -2,643
  • 1983: Jennifer, -2,767; Jason, -5,512
  • 1984: Jennifer, -3,784; Jason, -5,167
  • 1985: Jennifer, -7,903; Jason, -3,905
  • 1986: Jennifer, -6,474; Joshua, -4,655
  • 1987: Jennifer, -3,483; Jason, -3,054
  • 1988: Ashley, -4,873; Jason, -3,441
  • 1989: Jennifer, -3,888; Jason, -3,292
  • 1990: Tiffany, -2,555; Adam, -2,216
  • 1991: Brittany, -7,446; Christopher, -5,219
  • 1992: Jessica, -5,047; Michael -6,409
  • 1993: Chelsea, -4,885; Michael, -4,821
  • 1994: Ashley, -4,571; Michael, -5,089
  • 1995: Jessica, -4,175; Michael, -3,060
  • 1996: Jessica, -3,752; Michael, -3,043
  • 1997: Jessica, -3,142; Cody, -2,660
  • 1998: Jessica, -2,816; Christopher, -2,104
  • 1999: Brittany, -1,903; Austin, -2,710
  • 2000: Brittany, -2,760; Austin, -4,824
  • 2001: Hannah, -2,366; Brandon, -2,445
  • 2002: Taylor, -2,220; Jacob, -1,968
  • 2003: Ashanti, -1,983; Austin, -2,850
  • 2004: Hannah, -2,034; Zachary, -1,832
  • 2005: Alexis, -1,503; Jacob, -2,059
  • 2006: Emily, -2,540; Ryan, -1,557
  • 2007: Emily, -2,050; Joshua, -1,664
  • 2008: Hannah, -3,738; Christopher, -2070
  • 2009: Emily, -2,084; Anthony, -2,099

I’ve already written about some of the names above (click the links to see the posts) and will write about others in the future. In the meanwhile, feel free to beat me to it! Comment below with the backstory on the fall of Shirley in the late ’30s, Linda in the early ’50s, etc.

Source: SSA

Image: Adapted from Fall (6282684630) by Kenny Louie under CC BY 2.0.

Baby names that rose the fastest in the U.S data, 1881 to today (absolute increase)

hot air balloons

Having déjà vu?

A couple of months ago, we looked at a long, year-by-year list of the top baby name rises. A month after that, we saw the corresponding list of top drops.

On that second post, Frank B. left a comment in which he asked about absolute rises and drops — because the lists only covered relative movement within the data. So I thought two more posts were in order: top raw-number rises, and top raw-number drops.

We’ll start with the rises again. Just keep in mind that the SSA numbers don’t become very accurate until the mid-to-late 20th century, so many of the numbers below don’t quite reflect reality.

Here’s the format: Girl names are on the left, boy names are on the right, and the numbers represent single-year rises in usage. From 1880 to 1881, for instance, the usage of the girl name Ethel increased by 155 babies and the usage of the boy name Chester increased by 106 babies.

  • 1881: Ethel, +155; Chester, +106
  • 1882: Mary, +1,229; John, +788
  • 1883: Bertha, +173; Grover, +71
  • 1884: Mary, +1,205; Grover, +675
  • 1885: Helen, +148; Willie, +36
  • 1886: Mary, +762; John, +270
  • 1887: Ethel, +208; Harold, +55
  • 1888: Mary, +1,866; William, +1,235
  • 1889: Ruth, +223; Russell, +52
  • 1890: Mary, +430; Charlie, +112
  • 1891: Ruth, +662; Theodore & Herbert, +34 (tie)
  • 1892: Mary, +1,471; John, +1,358
  • 1893: Esther, +558; Claude, +41
  • 1894: Marie, +437; John, +189
  • 1895: Anna, +385; James, +225
  • 1896: Helen, +369; William, +470
  • 1897: Thelma, +159; Dewey, +95
  • 1898: Mary, +994; Dewey, +957
  • 1899: Mildred, +188; Kenneth, +24
  • 1900: Mary, +3536; John, +2,840
  • 1901: Retha, +25; Theodore, +21
  • 1902: Mary, +1,350; John, +1,009
  • 1903: Dorothy, +371; Jack, +88
  • 1904: Mary, +687; John, +499
  • 1905: Mary, +1,105; Charles, +201
  • 1906: Alice, +581; Robert, +225
  • 1907: Mary, +1,211; James, +799
  • 1908: Mary, +1,085; William, +622
  • 1909: Helen, +813; James, +582
  • 1910: Mary, +3,589; John, +1,860
  • 1911: Dorothy, +1,551; John, +1,995
  • 1912: Mary, +7,910; John, +11,140
  • 1913: Mary, +4,342; John, +4,738
  • 1914: Mary, +8,705; John, +8,621
  • 1915: Mary, +12,842; John, +9,634
  • 1916: Mary, +3,246; Robert, +3,004
  • 1917: Mary, +2,847; Robert, +3,474
  • 1918: Dorothy, +3,179; Robert, +5,409
  • 1919: Betty, +1,304; Willie, +409
  • 1920: Mary, +5,141; Robert, +7,656
  • 1921: Betty, +3,618; Robert, +4,096
  • 1922: Betty, +3,259; Richard, +1,165
  • 1923: Betty, +5,097; Robert, +2,300
  • 1924: Betty, +4,605; Robert, +4,685
  • 1925: Gloria, +2,835; Richard, +2,034
  • 1926: Barbara, +1,917; Richard, +1,864
  • 1927: Mary, +2,787; Donald, +2,935
  • 1928: Dolores, +2,843; Herbert, +3,049
  • 1929: Joan, +3,806; Donald, +1,456
  • 1930: Joan, +3,812; Richard, +2,602
  • 1931: Joan, +3,633; Ronald, +1,086
  • 1932: Barbara, +4,514; Ronald, +4,411
  • 1933: Carol, +1,650; Franklin, +2,603
  • 1934: Shirley, +8,523; James, +3,124
  • 1935: Shirley, +19,514; David, +1,664
  • 1936: Carol, +2,785; Robert, +1,968
  • 1937: Barbara, +3,230; David, +3,493
  • 1938: Judith, +4,729; James, +2,526
  • 1939: Judith, +5,748; David, +2,366

(From the SSA: “Note that many people born before 1937 never applied for a Social Security card, so their names are not included in our data.”)

  • 1940: Linda, +7,657; John, +3,739
  • 1941: Linda, +5,355; James, +4,262
  • 1942: Linda, +7,882; James, +10,450
  • 1943: Linda, +6,831; James, +3,072
  • 1944: Cheryl, +5,092; Gary, +2,192
  • 1945: Linda, +3,065; Michael, +3,179
  • 1946: Linda, +11,239; Robert, +14,194
  • 1947: Linda, +46,978; David, +11,381
  • 1948: Deborah, +5,409; Mark, +2,503
  • 1949: Deborah, +7,953; Michael, +7,417
  • 1950: Deborah, +9,877; Michael, +5,220
  • 1951: Deborah, +12,954; Michael, +7,531
  • 1952: Debra, +9,782; David, +7,043
  • 1953: Debra, +10,015; Michael, +5,172
  • 1954: Debra, +9,029; Mark, +6,899
  • 1955: Debra, +4,653; David, +6,653
  • 1956: Karen, +6,843; Mark, +6,596
  • 1957: Cindy, +10,268; Mark, +4,020
  • 1958: Tammy, +5,618; Timothy, +4,011
  • 1959: Donna, +9,517; Mark, +4,260
  • 1960: Lisa, +8,013; Jeffrey, +2,564
  • 1961: Lisa, +8,983; Todd, +4,005
  • 1962: Lisa, +3,394; Scott, +6,790
  • 1963: Lisa, +9,951; Paul, +2,884
  • 1964: Dawn, +4,196; John, +3,900
  • 1965: Lisa, +5,990; Rodney, +5,013
  • 1966: Michelle, +10,937; Christopher, +3,228
  • 1967: Melissa, +4,114; Matthew, +2,778
  • 1968: Jennifer, +8,612; Matthew, +2,253
  • 1969: Jennifer, +6,858; Jason, +9,346
  • 1970: Jennifer, +12,455; Jason, +10,788
  • 1971: Jennifer, +10,626; Jason, +6,897
  • 1972: Jennifer, +6,820; Christopher, +3,954
  • 1973: Heather, +3,032; Jason, +9,236
  • 1974: Heather, +3,836; Jason, +8,082
  • 1975: Amanda, +5,177; Joshua, +2,968
  • 1976: Jamie, +8,306; Jeremy, +4,940
  • 1977: Jessica, +6,467; Joshua, +5,205
  • 1978: Crystal, +2,865; Nicholas, +10,274
  • 1979: Amanda, +11,406; Joshua, +5,921
  • 1980: Tiffany, +6,614; Justin, +9,355
  • 1981: Jessica, +8,602; Brandon, +6,048
  • 1982: Ashley, +5,971; Christopher, +8,995
  • 1983: Ashley, +18,435; Kyle, +4,161
  • 1984: Ashley, +5,478; Joshua, +3,551
  • 1985: Ashley, +8,242; Andrew, +4,252
  • 1986: Whitney, +5,699; Andrew, +3,682
  • 1987: Kayla, +5,917; Justin, +4,874
  • 1988: Brittany, +4,594; Justin, +3,545
  • 1989: Brittany, +10,969; Ethan, +3,162
  • 1990: Taylor, +3,188; Jordan, +5,257
  • 1991: Shelby, +6,703; Dylan, +5,349
  • 1992: Taylor, +4,696; Dylan, +5,298
  • 1993: Taylor, +6,318; Austin, +6,125
  • 1994: Alexis, +2,208; Austin, +5,616
  • 1995: Madison, +3,516; Austin, +2,714
  • 1996: Madison, +3,632; Noah, +3,360
  • 1997: Hannah, +1,993; Jacob, +2,237
  • 1998: Emma, +2,700; Noah, +4,137
  • 1999: Grace, +3,460; Seth, +1,718
  • 2000: Trinity, +2,803; Ethan, +3,783
  • 2001: Isabella, +2,587; Logan, +2,973
  • 2002: Isabella, +3,334; Ethan, +4,143
  • 2003: Emma, +6,170; Aidan, +3,108
  • 2004: Ava, +2,364; Aiden, +1,472
  • 2005: Ava, +4,959; Landon, +2,070
  • 2006: Addison, +4,595; Aiden, +2,492
  • 2007: Addison, +4,328; Jayden, +5,596
  • 2008: Peyton, +1,954; Aiden, +2,472
  • 2009: Isabella, +3,667; Liam, +2,582

Some of these names I’ve written about already, and others I plan to write about in the future. If you can give explanations for any of those others right now, though, feel free! Just leave a comment…

Update, 4/22: Here are the corresponding drops…

Source: SSA

Image: Adapted from Turkey-2036 by Dennis Jarvis under CC BY-SA 2.0.