Talk:Prosser (surname)

Needs work

The article is in danger of becoming a list of every Prosser and Braose under the sun. The 'ancestors' have to be culled. The original research needs to be removed. This article needs a lot of work. Reliable secondary sources need to be supplied for statements. If you don't have a reference for a certain piece of information, it shouldn't be added into the article.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 09:00, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree completely! The whole section about a Braose origin for the name looks totally specious. Unless someone comes up with some evidence for this I will remove the section in a week. Doug (at Wiki) 15:30, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, it's October now. It doesn't seem like any more references are going to appear for a while. I'm going to remove all the Braose stuff to start with. I don't see any specific link between Braose and Prosser, other than some synthesising of sources regarding pronunciations, and some original research in drawing conclusion between name-distribution.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 04:14, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the 'Germanic' origin section. Nothing actually stated that the surname is derived from such a word. The refs tacked onto the end were just Latin-English translations, they don't seem to have had anything to do with any surname.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 04:29, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Removed unsourced note on distribution of the name in the 1600s. The figures given are based on a partial view of available evidence. As an example, there were several hundred Prossers recorded in London alone at this time period. (London, England, Baptisms, Marriages and Burials, 1538-1812 via Ancestry)Doug (at Wiki) 12:17, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Glad someone is tackling these rather dodgy surname articles! I've edited the article myself with a few obvious improvements to make it more informative and easily readable. But I would also suggest:

• a Spellings and Variants section be added - the (unsourced) info about Ireland spelings could go here for starters
• the Italy information is of little use. It only shows there are a tiny number of Prossers living in Italy (maybe ex-pats, who knows?). Is this notable? The only reason there is an Italy distribution map available is because Gens is an Italy-based surname project.
• the uncited information about distribution in Germany could be removed completely. The precentages don't tell anyone anything (other than that there are some Prossers living in Southern Germany) unless we know the numbers of Prossers.
• United States - statistical info from the US Census Bureau is not of much interest. In effect it tells us 'Prosser' is not very common in the US. The inline citation does not corroborate the stats anyway, so I suggest that para is removed altogether.
• the section People with the surname be renamed Notable people with the surname

Sorry to be so long-winded! Hope people agree with my suggested changes. Sionk (talk) 18:01, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

I agree with all you said. You could go on and carry out these changes. Especially the last one. With the present section title you could list anyone with the name - notable or not! - Doug (at Wiki) 19:06, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Mostly done. Someone will need to stick their head in an authoritative surname dictionary to complete the 'Variants' section!

There's is an other version of the name: in hungarian language ss=ssz, so in Hungary and the neighbor countries there some Prosszer, which is I'm pretty sure the same name, just in hungarian modification. DezeszBogyo (talk) 07:16, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Irish Prossors

The short paragraph about Irish Prossors and their supposed origins may be 'original research' which, unfortunately, would be counter to Wikipedia's policy. A quick search on the internet comes up with an email conversation between two individuals on the Data Wales website. IHowever, I've left an invitation to provide an authoritative reference, in case I've jumped to the wrong assumptions. Sionk (talk) 00:03, 13 October 2011 (UTC)