<p>We sometimes get what I would describe as "wrong" questions.</p>

<p>For instance, a perennial favorite seems to be questions about binning continuous variables, like <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/q/309018/1352">What is a best way of binning non-finite continuous variable?</a>, which currently has zero votes, zero answers and a comment (by me) recommending not to bin the data at all - with seven upvotes. Or <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/q/309932/1352">discretization to create intervals for continuous variables</a>, where I copy-pasted the exact same comment.</p>

<p>I don't think these questions will get a lot of answers, and they kind of veer into <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong" rel="nofollow noreferrer">"not even wrong"</a> or <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_III_error" rel="nofollow noreferrer">"type III error"</a> territory.</p>

<p>What should we do about these?</p>

<ol>
<li>Leave them open?</li>
<li>Find some reasonable existing question we could close these as duplicates of (for the two questions above, this could be <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/q/68834/1352">What is the benefit of breaking up a continuous predictor variable?</a>), even if it is not a duplicate in the strong sense?</li>
<li>Write an answer that essentially explains why the question itself is mistaken, even if such an answer does not <em>answer</em> the question?</li>
<li>Implement yet another closure reason (I believe that we are already at the limit of the number of closure reasons the UI will support)?</li>
</ol>
