So, this question came up about locating duplicate photos and it is, with respect to the actual question, a duplicate of a similar one asked three years ago. The problem with the earlier question is that the answers are either dated or ones that, today, would be flagged for deletion. In other words, yes, technically this is a dupe, but the original isn't worth anything to a newcomer asking the same question.
Now, as pointed out, we have an earlier meta question on this topic that doesn't have a whole heck of a lot voting and even, if you read the comments, talks to the question of aged out duplicates. This isn't really what I'd call a strong consensus. Even then, we had more than 3 or 4 core users...
Regardless, the problem with that meta question is that it presumes that old question has information worth resurrecting and that the people interested in the answer have sufficient reputation to revive it for that purpose. The OP in the new version of this question does not have the rep, so that avenue doesn't really exist. So, at this point, he seems to be faced with dated and useless answers, that we're potentially going to tell him to do, and no real way to fix it. That doesn't strike me as a way to encourage continued participation of newbies, nor does it really indicate a strong evidence of "expert" in our responses that would further encourage them.
I'm all for shutting down a question as a duplicate when old answers are still useful, but what do we do when this isn't the case? Thoughts on this?