-4
$\begingroup$

We don't have cross-site, close-as-duplicate capabilities. This makes sense, because Main sites shouldn't substantially overlap in scope (at least, not enough to warrant this extra feature).

That said, I believe that Meta.Math.SE overlaps enough with Meta.SE that creating a custom close reason to this effect would be good. Certain questions and some questions come to mind as candidates.

Reasoning:

  • Closing appropriate questions here as "already requested" on Meta.SE will redirect more votes to the Meta.SE question--this may make the feature more likely to be implemented.
  • Closing appropriate questions here as "already asked" on Meta.SE will allow our to focus more on issues specifically related to our site, rather than the SE engine in general.
  • Redirecting users to the Meta.SE site for information on feature requests is future-safe: it's more likely for a Dev member to reply on Meta.SE saying, "this feature was implemented," than to track down every individual thread on all SE sites and reply there.
  • Reminding Math.SE users of what is discussed on Meta.SE will foster a more unified culture within the entirety of StackExchange. (Off topic, but related: I'm beginning to think that much of our current meta-problems/drama has resulted from being somewhat isolated from the SE community at large. Reminding people to read Meta.SE may help alleviate this problem.)
$\endgroup$
8
$\begingroup$
  • +1 for "much of our current meta-problems/drama has resulted from being somewhat isolated from the SE community at large".
  • -1 because I disagree with the rest.

If Meta.Math is four light-years away from main site users, then Über-Meta is another galaxy, unfamiliar place inhabited by unfamiliar people. Not something where many Math.SE users would want to go.

Support questions can be efficiently answered by someone who reads both things and "speaks both languages" (polishes the support badge, one of 12 issued so far). Feature requests can still benefit from local discussion which will help users understand if they want to support the request. Of course they should have a link to Über-Meta version of the request.

I can't miss a chance to quote Shog9 again:

Totally not interested in getting lots and lots of people excited about participating on MSE. The last thing MSE needs is a bunch of folks who don't know how the system works and haven't bothered discussing their ideas with their own community first jumping in to tell us how we're doing it all wrong... Which, as you well know, is exactly what tends to happen and naturally leaves a bad taste. We're aiming to make MSE less SO-centric, not turn it into the first-level support forum for the entire network. The vast majority of meta questions should be asked locally.

(MSE means Meta.StackExchange here)

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ While you're polishing the support badge, polish mine. It's covered by rust by now. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Aug 4 '14 at 18:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AsafKaragila Happy 4th birthday, by the way. 2010-08-04, 00:09:17 UTC time. $\endgroup$ – user147263 Aug 4 '14 at 18:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Asaf Wait, what? Rust! What type of "bronze" does SE use? What about the silver and the gold? I sense a huge scandal. $\endgroup$ – quid Aug 4 '14 at 19:19
  • $\begingroup$ @quid: "Typically bronze only oxidizes superficially; once a copper oxide (eventually becoming copper carbonate) layer is formed, the underlying metal is protected from further corrosion." (Bronze, Wikipedia) $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Aug 4 '14 at 19:21
  • $\begingroup$ @Asaf: "Rust is an iron oxide, usually red oxide formed by the redox reaction of iron and oxygen in the presence of water or air moisture." (Rust, Wikipedia) $\endgroup$ – quid Aug 4 '14 at 19:42
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @quid: Stop being petty. Rust is any oxidized metal. :-) $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Aug 4 '14 at 19:50
6
$\begingroup$

I am against such a close reason.

Having this close reason to me suggests that it rather would not be appropriate to ask duplicates of meta.SE material. However, this would not be good. There is value in things coming up on the local metas, since in this way more users learn about the things in passing. (I think not that many users here follow meta.SE and I see no reason to push them to follow it.)

Posting a quick answer tailored to the situation an hand and linking to meta.SE for further details seems the better practice to me.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ No, I did not want to imply this. Duplicate closure on/within this meta is in place anyway, and should be used when reasonable, such as in your example of similar/identical support questions. However, it should stay limited to within this meta site (and each meta site more generally). $\endgroup$ – quid Aug 4 '14 at 19:08
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, I did not understand the feature request properly. I've deleted my comment. $\endgroup$ – user1729 Aug 5 '14 at 8:37

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .