This very recent question:
prompted a short discussion in the comments about it being a duplicate. As I wrote the (only and accepted) answer to
I linked to this while voting to close as a duplicate. The SE meta thread on this matter:
Questions may be duplicates if they have the same (potential) answers
Questions asking about the same aspect of the same concept, but with different examples, may or may not be considered duplicates. It depends how easy it is to figure out one example from the other. If it's only a matter of changing some numerical values or some variable names, they're duplicates.
The same situation with marking as a duplicate occured in
In both questions I voted to close I argued that the "answer there is aplicable to a wide range of instances, particularly to this one" and "that answer covers what is asked about here". However, this triggered comments saying that "adding a new result is pretty different from adding a new citation" and "But the two questions refer to two different situations".
For completeness, my opinion on the matter is that
if you found something that the reviewers didn't ask for, but adding it to the text improves the quality/completeness/etc. of the paper, you definitely should do it. [...] Overall - aim at the highest quality of the article that you can achieve at the moment."
While researching to ask this question, I found these questions asking about very similar things:
to which I'd answer similarly as above (i.e. with the above quoted excerpts).
Which one should be the canonical question for marking as duplicates questions asking
"can I add [anything] (e.g. citation/sentence/paragraph/section/plot/table/hypothesis/conjecture/proof/theorem/discussion/hypothesis/etc.) in the revision?"
If no existing thread is general enough, maybe we can edit one accordingly?