Hi. I was writing a new Zettel the other day and realized I had written an identical Zettel on the same topic a few weeks ago. Seeing this, I merged the content. However, I would still like to know how to avoid making duplicate Zettels.
I have thought and done a lot about this question since that thread. Main findings:
realize that having the same thought multiple times is a sign that it that occupies your mind, so that is positive, it means that maybe is it a key thought (note) that demands to be worked on
realize that sometimes you may have almost the same reasoning, but in another context; I still create the "duplicate" note in the other context, but I make a link to the original note
realize that notes are rarely fully identical; very often I found that when combining 3 the "same" notes resulted in a better note afterwards
All this of course supposed that you can find the original note. So, to the point in your question, following the comment of @Sascha on my question in the linked thread, I did a big effort to better organize my ZK: creating structurenotes, hubs, etc., till the point where it may almost seem overdone. Now, when I make an "identical" note (in concept), and I try to place (= link) it into my ZK, I almost certainly encounter the original note in the process. This enables me to either not put the new note (if it does not add anything meaningful) or to merge the notes at that moment. I found that structurenotes or hubs are very helpful for this, tagging notes less so (because before I would often come up with new tags for the same note). Needless to say this was a lot of work, but it pays off in multiple ways.
realize that having the same thought multiple times is a sign that it that occupies your mind, so that is positive, it means that maybe is it a key thought (note) that demands to be worked on
Becauase of this I also don't really worry about it. I tend to detect it when it happens by searching when I'm trying to create some sort of hub or when I'm writing on a subject. At that point I just merge them if they're similar enough.
In the end, getting a thought out of your head in written form, then look for places to put it and maybe merge the new idea with existing ones, that doesn't hurt, either.
I can relate to feeling weird about creating a new Zettel, with ID and title and all, only to then delete it again because you ended up tweaking/rewriting/expanding a much older note instead that you discovered after the fact.
A mantra to keep in mind: all notes are malleable, and can be dissolved, too, if needed.
My own opinion didn't change from back then: The problem of duplication mostly stems from operating as a manager instead of a gardner/warden of your Zettelkasten.
The top priority of a manager is to meet target metrics with efficiency. If you are a manager, you can and should do that because you have actual doers that engage directly with the material. If you have a Zettelkasten, you are both. If you just act as a manager ("knowledge manager"), there will be nobody to make sure that the actual doing (thinking) is taking place.
There are a lot of techniques, methods, tricks, hacks and magical spells. But those are inevitably means of a manager: Means for efficiency with the least amount of engagement. They can't solve the problem at all, because the problem stems from the lack of engagement.
@Sascha said:
There are a lot of techniques, methods, tricks, hacks and magical spells. But those are inevitably means of a manager: Means for efficiency with the least amount of engagement. They can't solve the problem at all, because the problem stems from the lack of engagement.
One answer is management deskilling and management silo dissolution. I don't mind duplicates if these are revisions. I haven't duplicated notes, but I have kept prior revisions around.
GitHub. Erdős #2. Problems worthy of attack / prove their worth by hitting back. -- Piet Hein. Alter ego: Erel Dogg (not the first). CC BY-SA 4.0.
Comments
There is a flowchart for that!
Yes, guilty as charged, Milord. I do this often. You may also check out some of the answers people gave in this thread: https://forum.zettelkasten.de/discussion/2270/hello-deja-vu-in-zettelkasten#latest
I have thought and done a lot about this question since that thread. Main findings:
All this of course supposed that you can find the original note. So, to the point in your question, following the comment of @Sascha on my question in the linked thread, I did a big effort to better organize my ZK: creating structurenotes, hubs, etc., till the point where it may almost seem overdone. Now, when I make an "identical" note (in concept), and I try to place (= link) it into my ZK, I almost certainly encounter the original note in the process. This enables me to either not put the new note (if it does not add anything meaningful) or to merge the notes at that moment. I found that structurenotes or hubs are very helpful for this, tagging notes less so (because before I would often come up with new tags for the same note). Needless to say this was a lot of work, but it pays off in multiple ways.
Hope this helps.
I've done that as well and find that I haven't really gotten into the habit of searching first.
I also agree with @erikh,
Becauase of this I also don't really worry about it. I tend to detect it when it happens by searching when I'm trying to create some sort of hub or when I'm writing on a subject. At that point I just merge them if they're similar enough.
In the end, getting a thought out of your head in written form, then look for places to put it and maybe merge the new idea with existing ones, that doesn't hurt, either.
I can relate to feeling weird about creating a new Zettel, with ID and title and all, only to then delete it again because you ended up tweaking/rewriting/expanding a much older note instead that you discovered after the fact.
A mantra to keep in mind: all notes are malleable, and can be dissolved, too, if needed.
Author at Zettelkasten.de • https://christiantietze.de/
My own opinion didn't change from back then: The problem of duplication mostly stems from operating as a manager instead of a gardner/warden of your Zettelkasten.
The top priority of a manager is to meet target metrics with efficiency. If you are a manager, you can and should do that because you have actual doers that engage directly with the material. If you have a Zettelkasten, you are both. If you just act as a manager ("knowledge manager"), there will be nobody to make sure that the actual doing (thinking) is taking place.
There are a lot of techniques, methods, tricks, hacks and magical spells. But those are inevitably means of a manager: Means for efficiency with the least amount of engagement. They can't solve the problem at all, because the problem stems from the lack of engagement.
I am a Zettler
One answer is management deskilling and management silo dissolution.
I don't mind duplicates if these are revisions. I haven't duplicated notes, but I have kept prior revisions around.
GitHub. Erdős #2. Problems worthy of attack / prove their worth by hitting back. -- Piet Hein. Alter ego: Erel Dogg (not the first). CC BY-SA 4.0.