3
$\begingroup$

There are a lot of issues that keep being raised again and again. Currently, basically the same answer would be provided again and again. This adds redundancy, which in itself is probably not a bad thing, but users/readers are going to have to sort things by themselves. This leaves room for entirely contradicting statements or inconsistent state. Assume for example bob wrote bullshit (he probably never does, but this is just for the sake of example) here and the same information was reiterated there: does somebody have to update every single place where the same argument is restated (and will somebody actually do it, maintaining consistency)? Also, any comment stated in one of these places could benefit the discussion in any other place, but is likely not being reflected and makes the above-mentioned issue even worse.

Are there any plan to merge into single, reference question the information for a specific point? Or is the wiki meant to be some sort of projected version (in the meaning of information losing function) of the information about crypto stuff basically already available somewhere else on the internet: every possible information is there, you just have to filter it out and to figure out by yourself how to make sense of this huge database with correct and incorrect (and everything in between) entries.

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

This is up to the community. There are a lot of ways to go about this. If the questions are close enough that they could be considered duplicates, the best thing a user can do is vote to close the newer question. When they do that, they can mark it as an exact duplicate and paste the URL of the duplicate into the window.

For a good guide on the options available to the community see "A guide to moderating crypto.stackexchange yourself - close voting".

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ This is a simple case, maybe the simplest. I was thinking more of sub-questions: in answering the new question, an older one is discussed (sometimes at length) in the process. However, the new question does not duplicate the older one. $\endgroup$ – bob Oct 15 '12 at 11:31

You must log in to answer this question.

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