This question was marked as a duplicate of this question, but the latter has been removed from the system. So the reason "This question has been asked before and already has an answer." is no longer appropriate since there is no answer (or question for that matter). Regardless of whether the new question should be closed on other grounds or not, shouldn't the system have not the original question to be marked as a duplicate?

  • \$\begingroup\$ It's no longer found because the OP deleted it. Things get messy when people don't follow procedure. \$\endgroup\$
    – W5VO
    Feb 14 '14 at 16:14
  • \$\begingroup\$ Just noticed the OP seems to have resolved by undeleting themselves, although the questions remains too broad in my opinion. \$\endgroup\$
    – PeterJ
    Feb 17 '14 at 10:28

I'm with tcrosley on this, in that this deserves to be fixed. But an automatic fix may not be so easy to implement. The logic to prevent dead links like this:

  • when question B is closed as a duplicate of question A, this should be recorded with question A. There may be several questions B
  • when question A is deleted the list of questions B linked to it have to be reopened

Frankly I think this is too complex and requires too much work for what it's worth, as it won't happen that often; questions aren't deleted that much. So an alternative:

  • when a closed question's link is dead, flag a moderator to reopen.
  • \$\begingroup\$ Your second suggestion makes sense. \$\endgroup\$
    – tcrosley
    Feb 16 '14 at 15:57

The user asked a question again with less detail, it was his original, so it was closed as duplicate, he then closed the original.

The user chose to remove their question.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I didn't realize it was the same user, since he had a different user id. If the user chose to remove the original question, why wasn't the new question automatically reopened, as there was no longer a duplicate? Again, it seems there is a flaw in the forum software. \$\endgroup\$
    – tcrosley
    Feb 14 '14 at 16:45
  • \$\begingroup\$ @tcrosley exact same user ID as far as I can tell. There is no flaw here, this is a duplicate of previous, and instead of fixing the previous he closed it. Reads as "user3305284" on both to me. \$\endgroup\$
    – Kortuk
    Feb 14 '14 at 16:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ My bad, I must have been looking at the question ids instead of user id. \$\endgroup\$
    – tcrosley
    Feb 14 '14 at 17:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ @tcrosley I make similar mistakes all the time. :) \$\endgroup\$
    – Kortuk
    Feb 14 '14 at 20:51

You must log in to answer this question.

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