I wouldn't consider "Embedded Systems" to be the same as "FPGA and ASIC". However, the discussion in an "Embedded Systems" board would mostly be about software design such as C or C++ or python, etc used with linux or other realtime operating system, or how it would talk with some IC on the board using PCIe address space, or what not.
In contrast "FPGA and ASIC" has more to do with logic design as described by an HDL language and mapped into physical logic that it infers in the silicon of the FPGA or ASIC. "FPGA and ASIC" would talk about the compiler tools and the physical implementation of hardware such as logic gates and flip-flops, drivers, etc. Its not software code at all.
"Programmable logic and FPGA design" would be similar. But this proposal was closed. However, I'm actually proposing to make this one even larger than just programmable logic and FPGA, by also including the topic ASIC design, which have to do with compiling the HDL down to the transistor level and fabricating them directly in silicon. FPGA and ASIC are in a sense related to each other, in that they both use similar compiler technologies. FPGA is just mapping to ASIC that is already layed out and manufactured as a programmable array of gates and interconnect. An FPGA saves time from being custom manufactured like an ASIC, at the expense of being slower and having less capacity. So really its very easy to put FPGA and ASIC on the same board. They share many of the same questions.
Another reason why ASIC and FPGA belong on the same stack exchange board, is because anybody that designs an FPGA can go to xilinx or intel and pay them a fee to convert their FPGA design into an ASIC design. All they do is run the compile again using an ASIC library that maps the code into transistors, instead of the FPGA library that maps it into FPGA look up tables.
Second, If I'm bring up the idea of "FPGA" as a stackexchange board again, and i'm acting independently, this is proof that this board shouldn't have been closed down in the first place.