I don't mean to pick on any of our users or mods, but I must admit that I do not see the merit in answering this question when it showed zero evidence of research: Within or inside? (it has since been edited by someone else.)
We all know that a lot of questions are contentious, with no clear amount of required research or no easy way to try to do that pre-asking research. But "Within or Inside?" is not one of those. It's a very simple question. Maybe not all dictionaries would raise the issue of the different parts of speech, but we don't require question askers to be successful in their research, only that they show they've attempted to do some. (That's why it's different from the old general reference close reason, which was about the intrinsic merits of the question, and was necessarily much more subjective and harder to judge.)
There are lots of high rep users who disagree with closing these questions. They have the right to disagree and also to answer them if they wish. But shouldn't the mods be modeling the site standards? Shouldn't mods raise an issue on Meta if they disagree with them, rather than blatantly ignoring them? If a mod has answered that question then we can only conclude that the standards have in effect been changed, in which case, let's just remove the close reason entirely.