What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 131 Stack Exchange communities.

This question:
Recommended SQL Server / T-SQL book

Got closed as a duplicate of:
Reading recommendations for: Microsoft SQL Server

The original question is over 3 years old. Although the new question is about SQL Server 2008, the original question contains only SQL Server 2005 books, so the original in no way answers the new question.

And like virtually all old questions, the original is dead. It does not receive new answers, votes, comments, or edits. As new books and versions of SQL Server appear, a single snippet of Q&A from 2008 will continue to be Stack Overflow's only answer to what you can read about SQL Server.

Shouldn't SQL 2005 vs 2008 prevent this from being marked as a duplicate? Shouldn't there be a limit to how far back reading lists are marked as duplicate, like once a year?

share|improve this question
1  
Voted to reopen in this specific case (3 years and a new mayor version warrants a new question imho ~ not sure about the once a year idea)... –  ChristopheD Jun 27 '11 at 21:25
1  
Would it be better on Programmers? I'm a bit up in the air as to the appropriateness of "best"/"favo[u]rite" book questions on SO. –  user7116 Jun 27 '11 at 21:30

2 Answers 2

up vote -1 down vote accepted

The reading lists, cartoons and other fun questions have all but disappeared. I think those questions attracted many good programmers and it's a shame to see them go. But the change appears to be intentional on SO's part.

share|improve this answer
    
Upvoted the question because I think it was valid to ask specifically "should new versions of questions be closed as duplicates", though I also upvoted Robert Harvey's answer as 'correct'. Downvoted this answer, though, because I think the "fun" questions are worse than useless, and am glad to see them disappear. –  Andrew Barber Dec 28 '11 at 17:53

If the original question contains information that is out of date, it should be updated (by posting new answers or editing existing answers) to reflect the current reality, rather than posting a duplicate question. Once the original question has been updated, it usually gets "bumped" to the front page, and is therefore no longer considered dead.

The example question you posted is a "poll" question. These kinds of questions ("reading list" questions, shopping list questions) are no longer considered on-topic for StackOverflow, although we do keep a number of them around for historical reasons.

Although the concept of "canonical" questions has been discussed many times here on Meta, it has never achieved official recognition. In a sense, every question that has already been asked is a canonical question, because it is the first time it has been asked.

Questions must be nearly exact duplicates of each other to be considered duplicates for closing purposes. This leaves room for a number of similar questions on the same topic to coexist. See also this blog post which explains that a certain amount of duplication is not only allowed, but desirable.

share|improve this answer
    
Alright, maybe the question is off-topic these days. People come to SE looking for a conversation with their peers; redirecting them to an old question is just rude. –  Andomar Jun 28 '11 at 9:25
    
If the original question refers to SQL 2005, should we update it for 2008? This is a question on a different version of software! –  JNK Jun 28 '11 at 12:26

You must log in to answer this question.

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