Inspired by Rawing, as the question states, current comment just states "duplicate". For e.g. check this timeline (shown below), the 2nd from bottom row is for a dupe-closed action (hammered). We should have the dupe target included here so that there is appropriate and easy(?) history.

The need for this arose when the said question was reopened and the original dupe hammering was questioned.

enter image description here

  • 1
    I don't think so. For this we have the revisions. Each list and its own purpose. I do agree there could be a link from timeline to revisions and the other way around. Aug 21 '17 at 19:23
  • Where's that? How can I access it? Aug 21 '17 at 19:24
  • 1
    you just replace "timeline" in URL with "revisions": https://stackoverflow.com/posts/45797001/timeline -> https://stackoverflow.com/posts/45797001/revisions
    – gnat
    Aug 21 '17 at 19:26
  • 1
    Revisions are also linked from any post that was edited, the "edited [time stamp]" links to the revisions. Aug 21 '17 at 19:30
  • 1
    @ShaWizDowArd The said question doesn't have any such links. Aug 21 '17 at 19:31
  • 2
    I agree that's a problem, there is already a feature request asking to change that. Aug 21 '17 at 19:32
  • 4
    I don't see any particular problem with exposing the duplicates inside the timeline. The timeline is supposed to be the complete record of the post, whereas the revisions history is really just supposed to be a sub-collection of information focused only on how the post has been modified.
    – animuson StaffMod
    Aug 21 '17 at 19:38
  • 1
    I don't see why the act of closing/reopening a question should show up as a revision of all things. I'm not a native english speaker, but AFAIK a "revision" implies that the post has changed. Showing that information in the timeline makes a hundred times more sense IMO. And even if there's a good reason to show that as a revision, what reason is there to not include that information in the timeline as well? Why not both?
    – Aran-Fey
    Aug 21 '17 at 19:38
  • -1, no hand-drawn circles... Aug 22 '17 at 6:49

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .