duplicates merging What do you think of the questions 341754: Finding the area of shaded region and 2518341: Area of a square inside a square created by connecting point-opposite midpoint. Which of them should be chosen as the duplicate target? Would it be useful to merge them?

Now I see that somebody mentions in the comments a third possible duplicate 2451722: Calculate the area of center square in the following figure. (And, of course, it is possible that there is more of them.)

My impression is that the question posted two days ago has quite good answers, which was the reason why I voted in that direction.

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] No whitespace in body: Linear Algebra is it subset of H subspace by J Doe on math.SE

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] No whitespace in body: Linear Algebra Question need help cant figure out by J Doe on math.SE

I hope it is ok that I've posted the above question concerning duplicates in this room. (Duplicates seem to be on-topic here according to room description. OTOH I'll certainly admit that this is mostly exchange between these two users. Should it be more distracting here, it can be moved to my room - perhaps with short summary posted here later.)

I'll also add that I do not have strong preference about the direction of the duplicate closure if there is no danger that the remaining open copy of the question is closed for the lack of context. But still, since the answers to the new question seem quite nice to me, if it remains closed in the current direction, I'd be for merging.

@user21820 Re: Came across it again when trying to find some post (which I still can't find). When looking for some post without success, you can try to ask in the dedicated chat room. If you look at the beginning of the transcript, you can see that this is one of the purposes of that room.

The room does not have much activity at the moment - which is why I try to promote it by mentioning it where it is (at least a bit) appropriate.

@MartinSleziak I did manage to find it in the end. It was about rearrangement of a conditionally convergent series involving the reciprocals of positive integers to give zero one way and a positive number another way.

This nonsensical answer on a HNQ, which itself is not a very good question and should be closed as a duplicate anyway.

This PSQ got onto the HNQ.

@user21820 These are the kinds of questions, and users willing to answer them that may ultimately put me in a position in which I can no longer remain on the site. (Already downvoted and voted to close it, only one more close vote needed.)

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Offensive answer detected: Splitting a rod multiple times: a question in probability by k43823 on math.SE

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted user: Splitting a rod multiple times: a question in probability by k43823 on math.SE

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted user: Splitting a rod multiple times: a question in probability by k43823 on math.SE

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted user: A quick question about the twin prime conjecture? by k43823 on math.SE

@user21820 Needs one more delete vote (now at minus 1 score).

PSQ

@user21820 Now Gone! I'll unpin now!

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Few unique characters in body, title has only one unique char: /////////////////////////////////////// by congruencer on math.SE

math.stackexchange.com/posts/2523557/revisions and math.stackexchange.com/posts/2523608/revisions lmao this guy is insane

@user21820 Closed now. (Daniel Fischer was the fifth voter). One vote to reopen. Question itself is at -1, as I speak now (time stamp), so it's doable to delete it, if there's the support. I made sure there is only one upvoted answer (as of now), but it's not going to go away unless the question is deleted.

Hello, @GabrielRomon! Hello, @kingW3!

@MartinSleziak I waited a bit to see whether I get some feedback about these two questions. Eventually I flagged for merging, so it is now up to the moderators.

@MartinSleziak I'm sorry I didn't get back to you. I agree with the merge, and I'd like to see this question as the one for which the other is a duplicate of it. If you think it might help, I can flag as well?

@amWhy I've added link to chat transcript in the flag, so it is possible that the moderator handling my flag will see also your message here if they scroll a bit down.

I have only flagged about merging, so if you think that the direction of the duplicate should also be changed, probably it makes sense to make a separate flag about that. (Well, depending how strong you feel about that and whether you think that the moderator handling the flag is going to notice your message here in chat.)

@MartinSleziak Thanks, @MartinSleziak I did flag after I wrote my last comment above, and suggested the direction I think is most fitting, but mainly chiming in on the merger. Currently the older of the two questions is marked as a dupe of the more recent one. I can live with that, but based on the quality of the questions, I think it should be the other way around.

@amWhy The question which remained open is the older one. (341754: Finding the area of shaded region.) And the one posted a few days ago is marked as a duplicate. (2518341: Area of a square inside a square created by connecting point-opposite midpoint.)

So it's not the way you've described in your message: "Currently the older of the two questions is marked as a dupe of the more recent one."

I am not sure whether that is what you wanted to say or whether you made some typo...?

I mean, the duplicate direction is (at the moment) 2518341 $\to$ 341754.

Oops, then I mean the older should be the duplicate of the newer. I think in my flag I used the URL of the post I thought should be the "source" post (which is a link to the newest question). So hopefully that won't confuse the matter, with the mods. Thanks for noticing that. The most recent post is the better of the two.

I probably should stick with post ID's.

The post have been merged with the newer post chosen as a target.

The flag handling seems to be quite fast now. (Although I am only guessing based on a few isolated cases. I suppose the moderators have more comprehensive statistics at their disposal.)

@MartinSleziak I think it's been faster too, perhaps, in part, due to having more active mods around. But you're right, who knows. I'm glad the merge was successful!