I've always had qualms about "unclear what you're asking" being a bit problematic on Skeptics because it's not clear who is "you" in there. Due to the Skeptics question format, which is about challenging others' claims, it can be the case that the "first order" question is (trivially) clear "is X correct when he states Y", but the claim Y itself (the "second layer", i.e. underlying claim) can be quite unclear. Often, the reason for the lameness in the claim Y is the lack of any quantification, typical of "yellow journalism", a prime characteristic of which is (according to Wikipedia) "scare headlines in huge print, often of minor news".
So how do you VTC such questions? My recently invented solution is to use a custom reason since nothing pre-made really seems to fit. I simply (planning) to write:
I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because the claim itself is too vague (and unremarkable).
from now on on such questions (and just did so on a recent question).
Examples on which I've applies this reason:
Soldiers from World War One actually died from lack of dental care.
Chinese markets are still selling bats and slaughtering rabbits on blood-soaked floors.
You thoughts/comments on this approach?