I saw [this question closed][1] as Not A Real Question (NARQ). What I want to discuss is not this closure in particular, but rather the act of closing a question as NARQ *when it already has an answer*.

NARQ questions are one or more of the following:

- ambiguous
- vague
- incomplete
- overly broad
- rhetorical
- cannot be reasonably answered in its current form.

This got me thinking. If a question has a (good) answer, then it:

- Can obviously *be* answered in its current form (because it has been)
- Can't be too ambiguous, or there is little enough ambiguity to cover all cases
- Can't be that vague because someone was able to figure it out
- Incomplete, possibly, but there was enough there to cover for a single answer, so perhaps it's complete enough
- Overly broad. If the answer is a good answer on the question, then it obviously wasn't so broad that it can't be tackled in the SE medium
- Rhetorical questions can still be answered, especially if there is an assumption being made and it's wrong

With these points in mind, should we stop using NARQ closures on questions that have good answers? (Use your own discretion as to what you think is a good answer).

  [1]: http://serverfault.com/q/477837/7709