user22727: I see that many of these identification request are being downvoted or closed by the wrong reason. Take this one as an example.
In StackOverflow, if you are making a poorly contextualized question, you get a Too Broad or Unclear reason (depending on the question, but it will fall in those categories). That is the reason this question should be closed with. Certainly not offtopic, since it's on-topic with the site.
Please, fix the closure reason since it is itself unclear why you are closing. Yes, it has a clarifying text in lower font, but:

There's no connection between something being off-topic and something being poorly asked.
It will rarely be read by the OP and will only notice "Off-Topic" most of the times, which will rarely be helpful to improve the question.

Please remember: closures are meant to improve the question to fit the site format. If you can't find the appropriate reason to close, perhaps there is not, and you should downvote instead of just closing. Otherwise, redesign the close reasons.
My proposal: Unclear what you are asking
For those comparing the cases with SO: The only OT close reason which was used as wildcard is regarding typos in code. Others still match:

Environment issues are OT bc they do not belong to being code issues (they are better suited in SU.se, askubuntu, ...).
Debugging help could fit in programmers.se (depending on the case) or codereview (when a significant part works and you understand the specific algorithmic problem). Is not a specific issue in part of the code you want to solve.
Asking for libs is neither a problem about a specific problem in code lines. Softwarerecs.se is the appropriate site.
General programming questions go to programmers.se when they are about methodology details, language capabilities, or software industry. They are not about specific issues in some code lines.
Working code and ways to do it better have no issues in code lines (since the code... works) and it finds its place in codereview.se.
The keyphrase here is: those questions are not about a specific issue in the code lines. If you intend to specify the wrong code, you are suitable on SO. If your question is too broad or unclear, it will be closed. If your question is crap, it will be downvoted. If a question fails to be MCVE even being somehow clear, it will be downvoted. IF A QUESTION DOES NOT SHOW RESEARCH EFFORT, IT IS ENCOURAGED TO BE DOWNVOTED, not closed, provided it does not get additional reasons to get it closed.


user1530: The reason it is 'off-topic' and not 'unclear' is because only the off-topic reasons are editable by the mods.
If we switch to unclear what you are asking we cannot guide users to the guidelines we want them to read.

user63: While the generic "unclear" close reason is applicable for most situations, the custom off-topic close reason is intended to give a more specific close reason by linking to a related meta post with an explanation of why it was closed and provide suggestions on how they can improve said questions.
This is not done without precedence afterall. We're taking a cue from how Arqade.SE handles identification requests. In their community they close identification questions unless the OP meets specific criteria, their off topic close reason then direct the OP to links and other relevant meta questions.
Additionally, please note that different Stack Exchange sites have difficult cultures, policies, and user base. While Stack Overflow is indeed the uncontested king of all Q&A site on the Stack Exchange family of sites. We're much smaller and much more underdeveloped than them. Often times we lack the manpower to keep explaining why a closed question unclear. Instead, we use these off-topic reasons to help us explain why, in greater detail, their identification question was closed and how they can improve them.
Identification questions have for the longest time been the most localized questions type on our site. But with many recreation SE site it's a rite of passage. People are always going to have a question about something that's at the tip of their tongue, but not everyone is articulate enough to put in into concise words. You mention that few people will read beyond the "off-topic" title and you're correct, but this is a problem with the user. Many of our new users don't like to read. Why? Because we are a Q&A site on a recreational topic, there is no expectation for professionalism like on SO. Instead, we have a large number of <18 users that mainly peruse social media and web forums, each with a very lax understanding of what netiquette is and how to articulate a question.
We initially tried closing low quality and poorly contextualized questions as "unclear." It it ended up not being very helpful as we had to keep explaining why their questions were unclear. We're a site focusing on questions on a recreational topic, we don't expect a lot of professionally or articulately worded answers from professional/knowledgeable users (like on SO). Instead, we expect them to be like the average geek that like watching/reading Japanese cartoon and comics to pass time. Because the users themselves don't know what they're looking for, they don't know how to properly ask it. Identification request questions make for bad questions as they are heavily reliant on the fallible nature of the human mind. We're currently in the process of discussion the viability of keeping current and future questions of this type on our site.

22727: <p>I see that many of these identification request are being downvoted or closed by the wrong reason. Take <a href="https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/30490/whats-this-funny-manhwa-called">this one as an example</a>.</p>

<p>In StackOverflow, if you are making a poorly contextualized question, you get a Too Broad or Unclear reason (depending on the question, but it will fall in those categories). That is the reason this question should be closed with. Certainly <strong><em>not</em></strong> offtopic, since it's on-topic with the site.</p>

<p>Please, fix the closure reason since it is itself <em>unclear why you are closing</em>. Yes, it has a clarifying text in lower font, but:</p>

<ol>
<li>There's no connection between something being off-topic and something being poorly asked.</li>
<li>It will rarely be read by the OP and will only notice "Off-Topic" most of the times, which will rarely be helpful to improve the question.</li>
</ol>

<p>Please remember: closures are meant to improve the question to fit the site format. If you can't find the appropriate reason to close, perhaps there is not, and you should downvote instead of just closing. Otherwise, redesign the close reasons.</p>

<p>My proposal: <em>Unclear what you are asking</em></p>

<p>For those comparing the cases with SO: The only OT close reason which was used as wildcard is regarding typos in code. Others still match:</p>

<ul>
<li>Environment issues are OT bc they do not belong to being code issues (they are better suited in SU.se, askubuntu, ...).</li>
<li>Debugging help could fit in programmers.se (depending on the case) or codereview (when a significant part works and you understand the specific algorithmic problem). Is not a specific issue in part of the code you want to solve.</li>
<li>Asking for libs is neither a problem about a specific problem in code lines. Softwarerecs.se is the appropriate site.</li>
<li>General programming questions go to programmers.se when they are about methodology details, language capabilities, or software industry. They are not about specific issues in some code lines.</li>
<li>Working code and ways to do it better have no issues in code lines (since the code... works) and it finds its place in codereview.se.</li>
<li>The keyphrase here is: those questions are not about a specific issue in the code lines. If you intend to specify the wrong code, you are suitable on SO. If your question is too broad or unclear, it will be closed. If your question is crap, it will be downvoted. If a question fails to be MCVE even being somehow clear, it will be downvoted. <strong>IF A QUESTION DOES NOT SHOW RESEARCH EFFORT, IT IS ENCOURAGED TO BE DOWNVOTED</strong>, not closed, provided it does not get additional reasons to get it closed.</li>
</ul>
 1530: <p>The reason it is 'off-topic' and not 'unclear' is because only the off-topic reasons are editable by the mods.</p>

<p>If we switch to <em>unclear what you are asking</em> we cannot guide users to the guidelines we want them to read.</p>
 63: <p>While the generic "unclear" close reason is applicable for most situations, the custom off-topic close reason is intended to give a more specific close reason by linking to a related meta post with an explanation of why it was closed and provide suggestions on how they can improve said questions.</p>

<p>This is not done without precedence afterall. We're taking a cue from how Arqade.SE handles identification requests. In their community they close identification questions unless the OP meets specific criteria, their off topic close reason then direct the OP <a href="http://blog.gaming.stackexchange.com/2012/08/i" rel="nofollow noreferrer">to links</a> and other <a href="https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5081">relevant meta</a> questions.</p>

<p>Additionally, please note that different Stack Exchange sites have difficult cultures, policies, and user base. While Stack Overflow is indeed the uncontested king of all Q&amp;A site on the Stack Exchange family of sites. We're much smaller and much more underdeveloped than them. Often times we lack the manpower to keep explaining why a closed question unclear. Instead, we use these off-topic reasons to help us explain why, in greater detail, their identification question was closed and how they can improve them.</p>

<p>Identification questions have for the longest time been the most localized questions type on our site. But with many recreation SE site it's a rite of passage. People are always going to have a question about something that's at the tip of their tongue, but not everyone is articulate enough to put in into concise words. You mention that few people will read beyond the "off-topic" title and you're correct, but this is a problem with the user. Many of our new users don't like to read. Why? Because we are a Q&amp;A site on a recreational topic, there is no expectation for professionalism like on SO. Instead, we have a large number of &lt;18 users that mainly peruse social media and web forums, each with a very lax understanding of what netiquette is and how to articulate a question.</p>

<p>We initially tried closing low quality and poorly contextualized questions as "unclear." It it ended up not being very helpful as we had to keep explaining why their questions were unclear. We're a site focusing on questions on a recreational topic, we don't expect a lot of professionally or articulately worded answers from professional/knowledgeable users (like on SO). Instead, we expect them to be like the average geek that like watching/reading Japanese cartoon and comics to pass time. Because the users themselves don't know what they're looking for, they don't know how to properly ask it. Identification request questions make for bad questions as they are heavily reliant on the fallible nature of the human mind. We're currently in the process of discussion the viability of keeping current and future questions of this type on our site.</p>
