So when I encountered this question it had four close-votes, all of them for its being "too broad". This struck me as inappropriate since the question didn't seem particularly broad to me (it was asking if a mouse could be genetically engineered to have alpaca hair).
The question is certainly not a gem, seemingly being an offhand obscure scenario generated by mild curiosity. My guess is a good answer would require more than a little effort, and would end up being along the lines of "not currently as we don't know all the genes involved nor the compatibility of the genes between the two species". Perhaps it should be redirected to another question generically covering gene engineering of random characteristics between random species (a question that probably doesn't now exist). Or maybe it should be closed for some other reason, but I presume that wouldn't be because the two specific species and the trait was being asked about made the question too broad.
Anyway, after adding a comment asking why the close-voters thought it was too broad, there was a response saying "It's just a way of removing a poor question. The Homework thing is another option if you just focus on the lack of research."
So it seems that random close-reasons are being used to try to get rid of questions that some feel shouldn't be on the site. Do we want to be using these two canned close-reasons in this manner? Do we need one or more new canned close-reasons that make explicit whatever the real reasons are for closing questions that the community feels contaminate the site by their presence? Shouldn't the close-reason give the questioner a reasonable clue as to why their actual question is not acceptable?