Account name:
Password
(OpenID?)
(Forgot it?)
Remember Me
You're viewing
babynames
Create a Dreamwidth Account
Learn More
Interest
Region
Site and Account
FAQ
Email
Reload page in style:
site
light
Baby Names
top QLD names
top QLD names
Feb
.
8th
,
2007
09:28 pm
krosp.livejournal.com
posting in
babynames
Ooh... the most popular names for 2006 in Queensland, Australia (where I live) are up
http://www.justice.qld.gov.au/news/names2006.htm
Flat
|
Top-Level Comments Only
no subject
Date:
2007-02-08 11:32 am (UTC)
From:
krosp.livejournal.com
I'm happy cos lots of my favourite names aren't even on the top 100 even though they're really really normal names (like Anna)
no subject
Date:
2007-02-10 03:55 pm (UTC)
From:
sarah-is-robot.livejournal.com
My little sister's name is Anna. I loooove that name.
no subject
Date:
2007-02-08 12:32 pm (UTC)
From:
wake-tonight.livejournal.com
I'm from NSW and I'm happy too, none of my favourites (except Alice #67 and Finn #69) are on there!
I do like Lachlan, but I wouldn't use it. I'm also suprised Sam was so low (99)!
no subject
Date:
2007-02-08 04:29 pm (UTC)
From:
sotypical42483.livejournal.com
Those are all pretty nice, if not fairly boring. Only ones I don't care for are Ella (don't like it as a stand alone name!) and Sophie (sounds so childish, prefer Sophia)
4 comments
Reply
Flat
|
Top-Level Comments Only
Profile
Baby Names
SSA Baby Names Site
Recent Entries
Archive
Member Posts
Tags
Memories
Profile
February
2019
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page Summary
krosp.livejournal.com
-
(no subject)
wake-tonight.livejournal.com
-
(no subject)
sotypical42483.livejournal.com
-
(no subject)
Style Credit
Style:
Fruit Salad
for
Leftovers
by
sforzinda
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
Page generated Jan. 25th, 2026 01:13 pm
Powered by
Dreamwidth Studios
no subject
Date: 2007-02-08 11:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-02-10 03:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-02-08 12:32 pm (UTC)I do like Lachlan, but I wouldn't use it. I'm also suprised Sam was so low (99)!
no subject
Date: 2007-02-08 04:29 pm (UTC)