Miscellaneous desk
< October 4	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 6 >

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.

October 5[edit]

Info on Credit Suisse in both World Wars[edit]

I am not sure if this is the right place, but I was hoping someone might have a better resource than I to find information about Credit Suisse in the early 1900s.

Around the 1980s, sources become abundant and much of the company's early history I've taken from "The History of a Bank" a book commissioned by Credit Suisse. The book is balanced and detailed, but I noted previously how Switzerland's neutrality culture influenced how it portrayed soldiers of war being forced into Swiss territory in the 1870 Franco-Prussian war (an "incursion" apparently).

As such, I don't trust it as the best source regarding Swiss' business operations with Germany and other Axis forces during both world wars. Especially knowing that many Jewish organizations and individuals took issue with Swiss banks giving their assets over to German authorities. For something so politically charged, I would prefer more independent sources.

So I'm looking for better sources especially around how both world wars influenced Credit Suisse and their response to the political situation. As a major bank from a country renown for isolationism, it's a particularly interesting topic. Corporate 03:34, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

looking for a water park[edit]

I'm trying to fide a place I.have seen advertised recently, a 'Savannah beach water park' apparently within a nature reserve and possibly still being built, but the ads had little information. I need a website address, contact email, something like that; but so.far my searches have turned up nothing. Hoping you can help.

82.132.244.24 (talk) 11:11, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your IP address geolocates to the UK. Is the park you're looking for in the UK? - Ka renjc 11:19, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, it was on the internet so it could be anywhere.for all I know, it may not exist at all and have just been the coursework of an advertising student. Sorry. 82.132.244.36 (talk) 11:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe helpful, maybe not ... I put "savannah beach" into Google maps and got this map showing Tybee Island, Georgia. Astronaut (talk) 12:18, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the "Water park with nature preserve", the thing that sprang to mind for me was Six Flags Great Adventure in New Jersey, which has on the same property a water park (Six Flags Hurricane Harbor) and a drive-through Safari (Safari Off Road Adventure), which is under renovations. I believe they are changing it from a "drive your own car", which it has been for many years, to a "ride in one of our vans", similar to Kilimanjaro Safaris in Disney's Animal Kingdom park. --Jayron32 12:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tybee Island does have a "nature preserve" but there was no water park when I lived there--and I cannot find one now. There is nothing at Great Adventure related to a beach or Savannah, and if they had a nature preserve it would feature snapping turtles and chipmunks. μηδείς (talk) 21:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Except that Great Adventure has animals of the African Savanna, and is advertised as such. --Jayron32 23:38, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A nature preserve is a preserve of the local wildlife, not the commercial display of animals that would die without year-round human care, a difference of which I am sure we are aware, and one I didn't think it necessary to mention. μηδείς (talk) 16:44, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or is your point that the word savanna would come up in a search? If so, then yes for great adventure, but not "beach", and "Savannah Beach" is a real place. μηδείς (talk) 21:04, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Over-the-counter painkillers in Europe[edit]

I just heard second-hand that it is hard to get low-level painkillers in Europe (and particularly Luxembourg) that could be simply bought over-the-counter in the US. Is it hard to get naproxen in Europe? Ibuprofen? Acetaminophen? Aspirin? Duoduoduo (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know about naproxen, have never come across it, although our article says it is now licensed in the UK for period pains. The other three are definitely available over the counter in the UK and in France. Ibuprofen is much more expensive in French pharmacies than in the UK, where both branded and generic forms are available in supermarkets. I always go for the generic as it is guaranteed identical to the branded product, and half the price. Acetaminophen is usually known as paracetamol. Itsmejudith (talk) 16:09, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Quick tip: generic is absolutely NOT "guaranteed" identical to the branded product. Absolutely untrue. The active ingredient must be identical, but the non-active ingredients may be wildly different. By "non-active" they don't mean "benign and safe for everyone under every circumstance". Been there, done that, got the $400 ambulance bill. --NellieBly (talk) 14:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the Netherlands aspirin, paracetamol, ibuprofen are freely available. Don't know if there is a limit. According to the Dutch Article Naproxen is available over-the-counter in 220 or 550 mg tablet form. The paracetamol-codeine is prescription only, I think. Jarkeld (talk) 16:56, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of expense, the generic 200mg ipuprofen tablets I bought yesterday cost me £0.40 for a pack of sixteen. Coated ones, too - I think that the uncoated ones can come in at less than 2p/tablet sometimes. Hard to imagine them being much cheaper! Andrew Gray (talk) 16:17, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to say I bought Ibuprofen yesterday at a generic supermarket where every little helps, and it was 36p for 16 coated tablets. They do however limit you to two boxes of each type of tablet. gazhiley 16:33, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the UK co-codamol is available without a prescription (it's in that category where the pharmacist herself has to look at you and verify that you're not all pale and twitchy). Tylenol#Products says "all forms of Tylenol with codeine require a prescription in the US". So in that case the UK is more permissive than the US. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 16:11, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://luxembourg.angloinfo.com/forum/viewtopic/201/0/ibuprofen-where-to-buyhow-to-get This link says ibuprofen is available over the counter in Luxembourg. Itsmejudith (talk) 16:15, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here in the UK, a piece of debatably effective suicide-prevention legislation makes it impossible to purchase more than 2 packets of most painkillers in a single purchase. A few months ago, a branch of Boots stopped me buying two packets of ibuprofen together, because my purchase also included a tube of topical ibuprofen gel. Even though the gel cannot feasibly be ingested, they stood by the rules, and I had to put one packet of pills back. AlexTiefling (talk) 16:37, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unsure if the Netherlands has such a rule, but if so it's not very effective. We tend to get a few TS-patients per month with an aspirin and/or paracetamol overdose. Jarkeld (talk) 16:56, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TS? Tourette syndrome, perhaps? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:44, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I 'spect it means 'tempted suicide ;-) Alansplodge (talk) 00:48, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TS stands for "tentamen suicidii" Jarkeld (talk) 01:15, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It seems to be virtually unknown in the anglosphere. It gets a mention at Failed suicide attempt, but otherwise nothing much in English. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 01:26, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That happened to me several times in the UK too, but you can just go back and keep buying more. Nothing like that ever happened in France though, I could buy as much as I wanted. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Naproxen is prescription only in the UK, whereas diclofenac can be bought over the counter. Ibuprofen can be bought OTC up to 400mg per tablet, and in combination with codeine. I also asked a question on Science desk recently about the availability of ketamine in the UK, and it's hospital prescription only: I asked because a US friend of mine recommended it to me for pain relief, and I was only familiar with its veterinary usage. --TammyMoet (talk) 18:08, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aspririn, Ibuprofen, and Paracetamol are all available without a prescription in Germany. However, most proper drugs (as opposed to homoeopathic water and low-dose plant-extracts) in Germany can only be bought in a pharmacy, run by a trained pharmacist. As a result, you won't find them in a supermarket, and they are quite a bit more expensive than in the US. But prices are by no means prohibitive - single-digit Euros for the typical pack of 20 or so. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 19:02, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An anecdote has just occurred to me that may be worth posting, and I'll see if I can find a news story related to it. A friend of mine was refused entry to Greece because she had co-codamol tablets in her bag, which are illegal in Greece. --TammyMoet (talk) 19:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC) Actually just googling "co-codamol in Greece" brought up a lot of forum posts regarding this. --TammyMoet (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See also Codeine#Greece; "Codeine is classed as an illegal drug in Greece, and individuals possessing it could conceivably be arrested, even if they were legitimately prescribed it in another country.". Alansplodge (talk) 00:52, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To give a reverse example, noscapine, an active ingredient of the various non-Papaver somniferum poppies used to make lower grades of 'opium' in ancient times, is locked up as "prescription" in the U.S. and Canada, but apparently over-the-counter in many parts of the world. [1] (I reference this only in regard to the legal status; I haven't evaluated the other claims) It's an antitussive, not an analgesic, but apparently antiinflammatory in nature ... in any case, would be useful to some people. Wnt (talk) 20:04, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Constitutional rights in unincorporated territories of the US[edit]

Our article Insular cases says

From 1901 to 1905, the U.S. Supreme Court in a series of opinions known as the Insular Cases held that the Constitution extended ex proprio vigore to the territories. However, the Court in these cases also established the doctrine of territorial incorporation. Under the same, the Constitution applied fully only in incorporated territories such as Alaska and Hawaii, whereas it applied only partially in the new unincorporated territories of Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippines.

And today American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands and the United States Virgin Islands are also in the category of unincorporated territories.

I read somewhere, but I just can't remember where, that the insular cases distinguished between "fundamental" constitutional rights and non-fundamental constitutional rights, the former automatically applying even in the territories but the latter not applying there (unless by act of Congress). I also think I read that Congress has extended by law all constitutional rights to the unincorporated territories. My questions are:

1. Is there a Wikipedia page that discusses the above in some depth?

2. Am I right that some, but not all, constitutional rights are "fundamental" and automatically apply in the unincorporated territories?

3. Am I right that Congress has by law extended all constitutional rights to the ~~unincorporated territories~~ unincorporated but organized territories?

4. What is the legal theory under which we can distinguish fundamental versus non-fundamental constitutional rights, and what is the legal theory that one set of rights automatically applies in the unincorporated territories and the other does not, even though the constitution is silent on territories? Duoduoduo (talk) 19:37, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

5. Is there a specific enumeration of which constitutional rights are in each category? Duoduoduo (talk) 21:13, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Different rights are stated in different ways, such as the states and the congress not being allowed to do certain things, certain things being unconditionally forbidden, the rights of the people to do certain things not being infringible. The right to bear arms "being necessary to the security of a free State" could presumably be limited in recently acquired territories. The analysis here is mine, but the text is the Constitution itself. μηδείς (talk) 16:41, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but as far as I can see that doesn't answer any of my questions, which have to do with the Insular Cases and the interpretation that they have actually received, at the time they came out or subsequently. Duoduoduo (talk) 22:11, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, it does not provide a concrete case. I have simply pointed out that rights which adhere to the states (Amendment 10) or which are expressed in terms of the states (amendment 2) do not necessarily apply to citizens of territories which are not states, and who are direct subjects of the federal government. μηδείς (talk) 00:47, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This may be of limited utility, depending on how much time/effort you're willing to expend on the question, but it appears that there is a book published by the U.S. government's General Accounting Office that addresses this very issue: http://books.google.com/books/about/U_S_Insular_Areas.html?id=0QYNAAAAIAAJ There is a pdf available online right now that appears to be the book in full: http://www.jarvisisland.info/pdf/US_insular_areas.pdf From a (very) brief skim of some of the contents, it looks to me as though the status of these rights (and, therefore, the answers to your questions) are a bit of guesswork right now for many territories. I'm not sure if this has to do with differing text in each territory's Organic Acts, or differing circumstances of their acquisition, or simply murkiness on the part of the courts. Anyway, it looks to me like this might provide answers, if you have the patience for it. Jwrosenzweig (talk) 02:37, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this reference -- it was one that I saw recently but lost. It says in footnote 6, regarding the 8 unincorporated insular areas with no native population: In general, fundamental rights, applicable to all individuals subject to the sovereignty of the United States, are “inherent, although unexpressed principles which are the basis of all free government.” Dorr v. United States, 195 U.S. 138, 147 (1904); Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244, 282-83 (1901). The Supreme Court has not defined precisely which parts of the Constitution establish fundamental rights. Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 13 (1957).

So the "fundamental rights" concept is relevant to the unincorporated, unorganized insular areas, but this reference doesn't say if the distinction still applies to the five inhabited (and organized) insular areas. Also in answer to my question 5, it says there is no enumeration of which rights are which. But my questions 3 and 4 aren't answered there. Duoduoduo (talk) 16:37, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(I have a fair amount of information about this, but I need to sign off and go to sleep now. I'll try to return to this thread in the next couple of days. If I forget, feel free to poke me.) Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:49, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli soldier's head gear[edit]

Can someone tell me the purpose of the head gear of the soldier on the left in this photo from the CBC website? Bielle (talk) 21:33, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WARNING: VIRUS. i downloaded the picture, and oped it it windows photo viewer. it open about 20 instances of it labeled "free fire screen saver", all instances said the picture was to big or corrupt. they closed with ease. 70.114.254.43 (talk) 22:08, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked the link. It opens on a CBC webpage. You don't need to download the image to see it; it is already open. I have no idea what 70.114.254.43 did, but it wasn't just to click on the link. Bielle (talk) 22:37, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The virus is undoubtedly an unrelated issue particular to your computer, not with the CBC. As for the original question, the mitznefet is camouflage intended to disrupt the silhouette of a helmet. — Lomn 22:38, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Lomn. It certainly succeeds in doing that. Bielle (talk) 22:41, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We even have an article (with picture): Mitznefet (Israeli military). ---Sluzzelin talk 23:34, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]