Miscellaneous desk
< December 7	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 9 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 8

Cat Litter!

How does cat litter work? The articles just explain different kind of cat litter without explaining why cats like crapping in it. Would a tiger crap in a litter box? Toko loko (talk) 04:23, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TV is picking up air traffic control

This is weird. My TV set, when tuned to a certain channel (that broadcasts pictures fine), picks up on what I believe to be the local air traffic control. I have yet to hear them name the airport, but I know ATC-lingo and this is definitely it. It's crystal clear quality, ie what you would hear if you were in the airplane or in the control tower being spoken to. While this is insanely cool (though traffic is low, so only chatter intermittently, about 30-45 minutes between each conversation (made worse by the late hour)), I can't help but think something must be wrong with my TV. This has never happened before today, and no greater changes have happened that I know of that should mean anything to my set. My TV reception is analogue, which you may have gathered already. Any advice or help on this issue? The TV is some 7 years old now, a Grundig of some kind. :) Thanks for all help. This'll be an interesting one. 81.93.102.185 (talk) 00:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ATC frequency is just above FM radio, modulated with Single-Side Band AM (IIRC). Our article on Television channel frequencies doesn't have anything in the ATC range (108.00MHz - 12xMHz), especially in Europe (your IP says you're from Norway). Usually there would be a lot more traffic for commercial airports than that, so you might've picked up an unattended GA frequency for an airfield close to you instead. More information, such as some excerpt and your location would be very helpful. --antilived^{T | C | G} 01:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am situated near Lakselv Airport, Banak. There should be three relevant control towers 'nearby'; Alta, Tromsø and Bodø Airport (which I think has control over most of northern Norway's airspace). Only minutes ago I heard a plane overhead, not unlikely an air ambulance, and I expect the chatter to continue as he either lands or is dispatched to whatever ATC controls the airspace beyond the local area. The traffic is not at all that heavy, and only rarely are there flights past midnight, especially in this perifery. 81.93.102.185 (talk) 01:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My first thought is a malfunction at the tower causing spurious emissions (that's one for the "Wash your mouth out" thread), or a stork bent their antenna or the deflector thingie that's supposed to keep them from irradiating their neighbors. A strong enough signal will "swamp" the front end in your tuner. I'd ask around the neighborhood to see whether anybody else's TVs are doing it and then call the tower and complain if they are. --Milkbreath (talk) 01:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting! There must be some clue as to the airport; usually you start air traffic communications by saying who you want to talk to and who you are. FiggyBee (talk) 01:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they likely do, but I forgot to tell there is a slasher movie on right now, and I can't turn down the volume without also lowering tbe volume of the ATC's volume. So I'm left with a lot of screaming and really icky sounds, which admittedly I'd rather not be hearing. For science, eh. 81.93.102.185 (talk) 01:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I called the airport, turns out they've had this problem for the last day or two. So, there you go. At least - granted they stay silent on the TV at the right times - I'll be able to listen in on interesting chatter. Still I'd welcome all ideas as to what exactly is going on, since the control tower person said they were clueless too. 81.93.102.185 (talk) 01:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you are getting it on broadcast TV you can try changing the length of the antenna cord for something either a few feet longer or a few feet shorter - that usually works pretty well. If you are picking it up on DVD/VCR/Satellite/CableTV stuff then take a trip to RadioShack (or your local equivalent) and buy some large "Ferrite Beads" (sometimes they are called "ferrite EMI filters") you thread the wire that goes from your DVD player (or whatever) to the TV through one of those, bring the wire back over the outside and thread it through again - and that does wonders for reducing the amount of junk you pick up. SteveBaker (talk) 03:16, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty sure ATC is narrow-band frequency modulation so it would be demodulated by a TV set just fine. (It surely isn't SSB). And the most common reason a receiver intended for one frequency ends up picking up another frequency is that the offending reciever has lousy image rejection so it picks up frequencies that are shifted by 2x the intermediate frequency away from the intended tuning point. Finally, remember that TVs pick up a different range of frequencies when used on cable television than when used for broadcast television.

Atlant (talk) 18:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/FindingAids/dynaweb/calher/rick/figures/I0025690A.jpg

what is this? where is this? etc? thank you. --Themirage (talk) 00:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking through the rest of the photos in the directory, it's the aftermath of the 6.3 earthquake which hit downtown Santa Barbara on June 29, 1925. FiggyBee (talk) 01:25, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what is iewa stand for?

--Themirage (talk) 01:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could be Inland Empire Wrestling Association or Internet Entertainment Writers Association. DuncanHill (talk) 01:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or the Iowa Education Web Association [1] Rockpocket 01:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 guitar questions.

What is the tonal difference between a regular Stratocaster and Fat Strat? Also, which is better, for a beginner, a Squier Stratocaster, or a Yamaha PAC012? MalwareSmarts (talk) 01:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on Fat Strat explains it has a humbucker. That article notes, "Stratocasters fitted with one humbucker in the bridge position, resulting in a pickup configuration noted as H-S-S (starting at bridge pickup: H for humbucker, S for single coil) are referred to as "Fat Strats", because of the "fatter", "rounder" tone offered by the humbucker pickup." Can't help with your second question, I'm afraid. Rockpocket 03:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yamaha. everytime. now days theyre all made in the same factory in Taiwan any ways but seriously though. I have a strat, a good one, and I also have alot of yamaha equipment as well as several other brands. I have played for years and years and everytime, ill take yamaha over all else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.151.98 (talk) 04:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm getting a Yamaha Pacifica. I tried it out at a local music store, tried it out plugged into two Line 6 amps, and it sounded great, even with plastic covering the pickups! MalwareSmarts (talk) 00:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

best graphics in a baseball video game?

--Themirage (talk) 01:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

who is the judge of montgomery alabama?

--Themirage (talk) 01:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are lots of judges in Montgomery, Alabama. I guess the top judge is Sue Bell Cobb; she is currently the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama. Rockpocket 03:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1

please can some one help me find psychological assistance and/or mental therepy in my area watford Herts uk thank you

You're in the UK? You want free psychological help? Your first port of call is your GP, if you have one. Make an appointment, explain the problem, and they should offer you appropriate advice. Psychological help is available on the NHS, although getting it can depend on where you live and how serious the problem is. Certainly your GP will do the best they can. If you don't have a GP, or you feel the problem is urgent, you can go to your local Accident and Emergency centre and seek help there. NHS direct might help you find the most appropriate service. In addition, If you just need someone to talk to, The Samaritans can be helpful. Generally, check out this link if you think you are having a crisis. 79.77.13.195 (talk) 14:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you call The Samaritans you might even get to talk to Phil Selway from Radiohead because he is a listening volunteer there sometimes. But seriously do take care. Therapy can really help you get through whatever you are dealing with now. Don't give up hope, it gets better! Saudade7 16:12, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mind, which is a mental health charity, have a helpline (details here [2]) which can help put you in touch with support organizatons in your area. Best wishes, DuncanHill (talk) 01:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Watford Community Mental Health Team (part of the NHS) have some information at this link [3]. DuncanHill (talk) 02:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is also an organization called SANEline who can give support and advice, their information is here - [4] DuncanHill (talk) 02:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Afraid of insects, worried

Hi, I have a fear of insects which is quite strong, I even get scared of butterflies. I don't ever want to kill a butterfly, but when they get close to me I panic and try to swat it. What should I do? --Arachnophobic.guy (talk) 04:19, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could see a psychiatrist. I can't give you specific medical advice, but I can tell you that you're far from alone. While fear of spiders or wasps (things where the fear is more legitimate, if you take my meaning) are more common, there are plenty of folks who get freaked out at completely harmless butterflies and moths. Under the supervision of some kind of counselor (whether an actual shrink or some kind of therapist), one common method of overcoming the sensitivity is to have the patient handle increasingly more lifelike representations of the bugs they fear. It might start out with pictures, then move on to stuffed toys, more realistic rubber toys etc. and so on. Matt Deres (talk) 15:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I remember reading once that if you have an (irrational) fear of insects, it could be due to some kind of childhood trauma where you realized that you could lose your limbs. Maybe you saw someone with missing limbs or deformed limbs, or maybe you got into some accident where you thought you might lose your own. Now granted, I read this in Readers Digest when I was in 7th grade but that really struck me and I have always remembered it. Something in Psychoanalysis I assume. Saudade7 16:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, you have taken the first step to a more comfortable life. Follow Matt's advice. You need to find a therapist who has experience in treating phobias and then talk to him about how he is going to improve your response to insects. However before you do that you need to be really sure that you want to overcome your reaction to insects. The success of the treatment is dependant to some extent on your personal motivation to change your behaviour. The therapy is usually slightly stressful but not frightening and the therapist will not ask you to do anything you do not want to do. It is necessary to generate a little anxiety to show you how easy it is to overcome it, and believe me it is surprisingly easy to overcome it. I look forward to seeing you renamed arachnophile! Good luck. Richard Avery (talk) 11:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maelstorm

Can a Maelstorm suck in a ship like in Pirates of the Caribean, or was that amped up to make the movie more exciting? How large do malstorms actually get? Maelstorm doesnt have any info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.101.53.177 (talk) 05:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The information in our whirlpool article is rather more comprehensive. According to that, the Saltstraumen pictured in the maelstrom (not maelstorm) article is about as powerful as they get.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:23, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How many soccer clubs?

How many mens soccer clubs are there worldwide, including all countries and all divisions of play? 75.21.180.188 (talk) 17:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately it's impossible to answer for all levels of play as there are many amateur, school and Sunday League teams that are not part of a formal Football Association. For example, the English football league system contains around 7,000 teams (the number changes yearly) which includes both professional and non-professional sides but doesn't cover all clubs playing in the country (the FA says it may be nearer 37,500 including youth clubs). These figures are for England alone and are all estimates. 62.136.140.178 (talk) 18:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've also asked if anyone from Wikipedia:WikiProject Football can help. 62.136.140.178 (talk) 19:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just including Football Association team from each country. 75.21.180.188 (talk) 20:39, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Volume of a bag

Aside from a water displacement method, what would be an accurate way of finding the volume of a plastic shopping bag and a Ziploc bag? Thanks. Acceptable (talk) 17:43, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fill it with a known-density material and weigh it? —Keenan Pepper 19:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with that method is that plastic bags stretch. Sancho 20:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So what is your definition of the volume of a plastic bag? I would argue that any useful definition has to include the fact that they stretch. SteveBaker (talk) 23:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Were you asking what mine definition is or what User:Acceptable's is? Sancho 05:26, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Acceptable's definition would be more useful for answering the question - but I'm curious as to why you'd discount the "fill, then weigh" approach on the grounds that the bags might stretch - when the usefulness of knowing the volume is probably in knowing the post-stretched volume. Personally, I think filling the bags with water then measuring the volume of water using a measuring jug would be a good measurement - but filling with water and weighing will obviously work just as well. That's a measurement of the interior volume. The volume of the actual bag itself would be tough to measure - you'd have to somehow squash them up into the smallest possible space without air getting in there...urgh! SteveBaker (talk) 14:32, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was just unsure how I would convince myself that I'd "filled" the bag... I could always just put a bit more in and it would fit. I guess you could fill the bag until it breaks, then measure what falls out. Sancho 22:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Polystyrene beads would not stretch the bags, if you have access to those. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:45, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The neatest solution would be to measure how many plastic bags can fit into the plastic bag...you may award yourself extra marks for amusement value--Tagishsimon (talk) 17:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was trying to find the maximum volume that the bag could hold. But the water displacement method worked better than I thought it would. Thanks. Acceptable (talk) 15:43, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Water is probably far denser than the average contents of a plastic shopping bag. So I would advise a researcher to collect a sample of plastic shopping bags as filled by baggers at stores (selecting the type of stores is part of the problem of definition: some baggers put one object in each bag). Then determine the volume and mass of the contents of each bag. Weigh the objects and determine their volume by measurement and geometry, or by water displacement if irregular shaped. This would be a determination of the actual used volume for the bag in practice, as well as of the typical density of the goods placed in the bag. Now select a fill material with that density. Perhaps it would be like Cheerios (no idea in the absence of data). If that were so, then having determined the density of the fill material, pour it into the bag up to some determined fill level and weigh it. This is an Operational definition of the volume of the bag. If you filled it with shredded styrofoam or Ping pong balls, you would get a smaller volume than if you filled it with water (or marbles, sand, or lead shot). Another approach would be to have it opening-down under water and fill it with air. Its lifting power would be a quick index of "volume" but with a different operational definition. Edison (talk) 17:39, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is the French cultural Appalachia? Gary, IN?

My apologies if the theme is boring. lots of issues | leave me a message 22:02, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the question. What do the French, Appalachia, and Gary, Indiana have to do with one another? Dismas|^(talk) 23:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He has been asking what the [insert nationality] version of Appalachia and Gary are. It helps to know that Appalachia is stereotypically poor, rural, and backwards, and Gary is stereotypically a depressed urban hellhole. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:06, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of the reputations of each of them but was unaware of the history of the questions here. Thanks for the explanation! Dismas|^(talk) 04:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have been lurking on this one, not having any specific opinions, and can say that I do not find the thread boring in the least. I knew about the reputation of Appalachia; learning about that of Gary will help me pick up on more American pop cultural references. There are others, aren't there, places that stand for a certain ambience or kind of people. Doesn't Missoula, Montana represent being a long way from anywhere else? (A more tame version of Timbuktu?) Or have I got it wrong? BrainyBabe (talk) 09:10, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard of Missoula as being used as a metaphor for the "middle of nowhere." The term often used is Podunk. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 18:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's another term, too, which is more vulgar. Some people prefer not to actually say the naughty words, so they abbreviate it to "BFE"[5]. Saukkomies 18:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BrainyBabe, it is always a delight to respond to someone who is interested in my country (the US). I'll plug in my own opinions about what you were asking about, but keep in mind they are just my own ideas - others may have completely contradictory thoughts about this. So here goes: There are some places in the US where people are almost as rooted to the immediate place around them as they are in the typical traditional European areas. Many people living on Manhattan Island think that anything west of the Jersey Shore is off the map. I lived in the South Side of Chicago a while (around 111th Street), and personally met people who had never seen the Sears Tower in downtown Chicago. I know of people who have never been more than 20 miles from where they were born - and I'm not talking just about old people, but people who are in their 20s and 30s, too.

So the idea of Missoula representing someplace that is far from anywhere else is relative! If you happen to live in the West, Missoula doesn't seem to be far away. But if you live in Long Island, New York, maybe it does. Keep in mind that the West is the fastest growing area of the United States - and has been for the past 25 years or so. There are some major metropolitan urban areas out West that in no way can be thought of any more as just "cowboy towns". I'm talking about places like Denver, Salt Lake City, Las Vegas, Phoenix, L.A., San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle. With so many people living within a day or two drive away, I doubt that Missoula is really that "far away" as might be imagined...

Missoula itself has a very strong reputation of being a liberal-minded haven for published authors, artists, and free-wheeling hippies. I read somewhere that Missoula has more published authors per capita than any other town in the US - including New York City. There are a handful of such towns in the US that are like Missoula, more or less. They all have one thing in common: they have large universities. So along with Missoula, there is Boulder, Colorado; Eugene, Oregon; Madison, Wisconsin; Santa Cruz, California; Athens, Georgia; Bloomington, Indiana; and probably some others I don't know about. One town that is NOT on that list (in my opinion) is Berkeley, California, which in spite of its reputation for being a very radical school back in the 1960s, is from what my own experience has shown me to be quite conservative. It is rather Santa Cruz (down near Monterey) that is the real hippie college town of California. At any rate, if Missoula represents anything in the broader consciousness of America, I'd say it would fall into this category of very liberal (read: hippie) college towns.

I would say that if anyplace in the Lower 48 States (not including Alaska and Hawaii) represented the "back of beyond", it would probably be somewhere in the middle of Nevada or North Dakota. Nevada has taken on in the popular culture of the US an image of being the place where really weird stuff happens. This comes up a lot in movies that portray Nevada as a scary desolate place where serial killers, sociopathic hermits, and dirt-poor trailer trash wackos live. Of course Nevada is actually a very beautiful place with lots of wide open desert and pine-covered mountain ranges where eagles fly and there's nobody around to hassle you. North Dakota is a flatter, more agricultural version of Nevada, and would (in my opinion) be also a place where people would say is far from anywhere.

Finally, Gary, Indiana is probably what I would consider to be close to the most heavily industrialized parts of the Ruhr Area factory towns (or rather, what my impression of the Ruhr towns is - which may be outdated). It has lots of big mills and factories, including some of the few steel mills that are still in operation in the US. The air always smells in Gary from the pollution. It also is an incredibly congested traffic corridor, as it sits at the very southern bottom of Lake Michigan. A couple of major east-west Interstate Freeways (I-90 and I-80) converge and pass through Gary and its neighbor city of Hammond, Indiana. All traffic that is going from north of a line that stretches from San Fransisco to Chicago that is heading east must pass through this corridor. Likewise, traffic heading west that is coming north of a line stretching from Gary to New York City must also pass through this corridor. This makes it one of the most heavily-traveled sections of road in North America. Every day thousands of big semi trucks drive along that stretch of Interstate, making it a nightmare to drive in, especially in inclement weather. So, Gary is not really one of the prettiest spots in the US... Saukkomies 18:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For "middle of nowhere" in the 48 states I'd suggest northern Maine and maybe northern Michigan. Also perhaps parts of Wyoming and northwestern Nebraska. Missoula is on I-90! You can't miss it. None of this relates to the Appalachia of France. I couldn't say, but might it be Burgandy? Brittany? Pfly (talk) 10:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I live in Northern Michigan! Okay, well, I do see your point. :) Saukkomies 23:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone, especially Saukkomies. That list of university towns is interesting; would I be correct in adding Austin, Texas? The Ruhr is largely post-industrial now, as is Sheffield (the English Gary). There is a series of joke maps sold as posters, depicting a geographically truncated view of the world. The one I know best is from the point of view of a New Yorker, where, as is stated above, not much exists west of the river, bar a hazy gimpse of Hollywood a long way away. What is this series called? BrainyBabe (talk) 07:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Brainybabe. It is good to know about the Ruhr and Sheffield developing into post-industrial towns. They sound like many of the old "Steel Belt" cities in the U.S., such as Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Chicago, Illinois, Cleveland, Ohio, Erie, Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Buffalo, New York, to name a few. All of these cities have fairly successfully developed a healthy economy beyond heavy industry. I leave off a couple of cities that quite haven't made it, including Detroit, Michigan and Gary, Indiana, which are still struggling along. As per Austin, Texas - I would say that I'd be inclined to agree with you about it being roughly in the same category as the other very liberal college towns I named. Perhaps it would be most closely akin to Madison, Wisconsin, since both cities are not only very liberal college towns, but are also the capital cities of their respective state. That adds a different influence with all the government employees and legislators present. But, yes, I've never been to Austin, but I have heard it is a wonderful city with lots of culture and which is very liberal. The map you mentioned is very familiar to me, too, but I'm not sure where I've seen it exactly. Saukkomies 07:39, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brainybabe, maybe you are thinking of Saul Steinberg's New Yorker cover of March 29, 1976[6] . --Gui Moquette (talk) 14:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bingo! The collective mind/memory is a wonderful thing. BrainyBabe (talk) 07:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Name 'Dakota'

Trendy in the US as a child's name, but I was told it's offensive and insensitive. Is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.77.72 (talk) 23:48, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, not to the good folk of North Dakota and South Dakota. They might be a little miffed if you referred to either state as just "Dakota", but that's understandable (despite the publicity provided by Doris Day). I imagine these 2 states are sometimes referred to collectively as "the Dakotas". -- JackofOz (talk) 01:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Jack, they are referred to as "the Dakotas". Dismas|^(talk) 04:31, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am fairly certain there is nothing offensive about Dakota. It is the autonym (name used for themselves as a people) by the Santee Sioux people. The states took their name from the indigenous people who lived in the eastern Dakotas. (Jack is correct that North and South Dakota are collectively referred to as "the Dakotas".) The closely related Lakota people occupied much of the central and western Dakotas. What some Dakota/Lakota people find offensive is the word Sioux. As the Sioux article explains, the word Sioux was taken from the language of the neighboring Ojibwa people and was long believed to be insulting, though in fact it may originally have meant just "speaker of a foreign language". Still, many Dakota/Lakota people today find the word Sioux offensive. Marco polo (talk) 02:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone should tell Susan Janet Ballion. Rockpocket 07:03, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There could, possibly, be people of Dakota ethnicity who object to the use of their ethnicity as a given name. Corvus cornix_talk 04:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not Native American, but I do have some friends who are, and have been exposed to a degree to Native culture. I had the opportunity to go to a booksigning by the noted Native American author Sherman Alexie back in 1999 when he was in Chicago. He discussed a wide range of topics with the fairly large crowd that came to hear him, and one of the topics he covered was the recent phenomenon of naming children after Indian Tribes, which Dakota is one, of course. He named a bunch of similar names like this: Lakota, Shawnee, Hopi, etc. And then he started to jokingly suggest that they should also name kids after ALL of the tribes, including Ho Chunk (a tribe located near Chicago in Wisconsin). So it seems that at least one Native American author seems to regard this practice as innocuous and good material for humor. --Saukkomies 04:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC

Several years ago, some element of North Dakota government or civil society proposed to rename itself simply "Dakota", so presumably they don't find it too offensive. --Sean 04:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My guess is that the reason someone might find it offensive, or rather insensitive, is because a non-Dakota (people not state) person is using their name for a non-Dakota child, thereby watering down the meaning of 'Dakota' as a way of identifying themselves. If you say 'I'm Dakota', people might not know whether you're talking about your nationality or your given name. It could be considered disrespectful of the culture, because you don't necessarily educate a daughter called Dakota in Dakota ways or name her such as a matter of pride in her heritage, but rather as a part of a fad. I've no doubt that naming a child after an Australian Aboriginal group would be considered in rather poor taste. Steewi (talk) 03:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]