<p><strong>No, we shouldn't</strong>. If 'asking for datasets' close reason has been used, it has been useful (pretty much the same way as 'opinion-based' has, the second least used topic). </p>

<p><strong>However</strong>, the idea of splitting the 'not about statistics' and 'pure programming is' good. Despite initially declined, we can try to insist with the SE staff to have a 4th close reason (as many other SE sites already have). Moreover, sooner or later that close reason will be broadened to include other types of shopping list questions here in CV SE (we can observe a shift in how users perceive such types of questions are in course; recent <a href="https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5333/favorite-data-analysis-cartoon-question-should-be-closed/5334#5334">example</a>).</p>

<hr>

<p>Going either way (removing or not removing, splitting or not splitting), I also suggest we reorder the close reasons in the dialog from top to bottom according to their frequency of use (reported in <a href="https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5560/extract-software-specific-default-close-reason/5606#5606">Extract software-specific default close reason</a>):</p>

<ul>
<li>programming;</li>
<li>self-study;</li>
<li>not about statistics, machine-learning, etc.*</li>
<li>asking datasets;</li>
<li>blatantly off-topic (for &lt;3k rep) / other (>=3k rep) .</li>
</ul>

<p>*I am assuming if split occurs, 'not about statistic' would rank 3rd (but this could be reassessed after some time with real data).</p>

<p>Here is the current dialog order:</p>

<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/mWChI.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/mWChI.png" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>

<p>The picture also illustrates the dialog has space for adding more topics if we want to.</p>
