This question already has an answer here:

I'm asking this because I think an older question with a full answer shouldn't be declared a duplicate to a newer one. What the moderators think about this?


marked as duplicate by Martin Sleziak, Peter Woolfitt, Surb, quid, Najib Idrissi Aug 31 '15 at 20:10

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I think it's better if the duplicate notice points to the question with the most "canonical" answer to the question. The chronology is secondary to me. In a couple of years nobody will care which question was asked four months earlier than the other. $\endgroup$ – 40 votes Jul 18 '13 at 15:56
  • $\begingroup$ The newer question is more general: Product of $n$ cyclic groups vs. $2$ groups. $\endgroup$ – Ayman Hourieh Jul 18 '13 at 18:53
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I agree with the principle of the older question getting the nod. Also the point about the newer question being more general is IMHO not too relevant. The older question is both the base case and the inductive step in a proof by induction of the more "general case", so... $\endgroup$ – Jyrki Lahtonen Jul 18 '13 at 19:25
  • $\begingroup$ @40votes Maybe in a couple of years this site will be gone, or an asteroid will hit earth. $\endgroup$ – user26857 Jul 18 '13 at 19:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If you want to know what the moderators think, why not ask the moderators, instead of posting here where you'll find out what everybody thinks? $\endgroup$ – Gerry Myerson Jul 19 '13 at 9:55
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Anyway, I'm pretty sure this has been discussed here before --- if I could find the earlier discussion, I'd vote to close one of them as a duplicate --- but, which one? $\endgroup$ – Gerry Myerson Jul 19 '13 at 10:00
  • $\begingroup$ @GerryMyerson Please find it first and then we can open an poll in order to decide which one is a duplicate. $\endgroup$ – user26857 Jul 19 '13 at 10:03
  • $\begingroup$ I tried. No luck. $\endgroup$ – Gerry Myerson Jul 19 '13 at 10:04
  • $\begingroup$ @GerryMyerson Perhaps this one? What to do with a newer post and a related, older, less thorough post? $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Jul 20 '13 at 5:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The discussion in the thread found by Martin wasn't quite informed. The OP was concerned that "both of them will end up closed as duplicates of the other". That simply can't happen. The proposed solution - leave links in comments and do not close either post - is suboptimal: comments are easily overlooked, unlike duplicate notices. $\endgroup$ – 40 votes Jul 20 '13 at 5:40
  • $\begingroup$ @Martin, thanks. I don't think that's what I had in mind. Maybe it was on meta-MO. $\endgroup$ – Gerry Myerson Jul 20 '13 at 5:42

As stated here (oldest precedent on mother meta.SE I could find), there is no rule against closing the "worse" duplicate instead of the "newer" one. However, questions should not be closed as duplicates if they are actually merely subsets, since the most awesome answer to the latter may fail for a more general case and might never have been posted to that one - at least on gaming.SE consensus is Duplicate information in answers (in part or in whole) does not automatically make questions duplicates.