Normally I would vote to close a question which had been pointed out as a duplicate in a comment and which indeed was a duplicate. However, I noticed that the question concerned was originally posted in August 2012, over a decade ago. It occurred to me that the contributors to this site had significantly evolved and grown in number since then. Thus the question seemed worthy of a revisit, particularly since I didn't think that it had originally been answered definitively.
Now the issue gets more complicated. The question was reposted in March 2013, and that version was closed as a duplicate. However, this closed version featured significantly more, and more-definitive, answers than did the original. In my opinion, the question had been answered well on that occasion (but then who am I to judge?). Nevertheless, an answer to the originally posted question did provide some interesting analysis of the general background issues entailed in the question, which was not given in any other answer.
If it were up to me, I would close only the latest version of the question. But the general issue remains: are there cases when a very old question is worthy of a revisit?