Yes. Per this Meta.SE post, moderators can curate the list of site-specific off-topic close reasons:
- Each site will have a list of its own specific pre-selected “Off-Topic” reasons
- These lists will be determined by the communities, and moderators will be able to update them, subject to review by each other, their community, and the SE team
However, I don't believe we can remove the migration option, although I'm welcome to correction on that point.
The "not science fiction or fantasy" custom close reason is certainly popular; in the last 90 days (10k+ users only; sorry), 12 questions were closed with a custom reason that was some variation of "this is not about science fiction or fantasy" with no additional information given1, out of 32 total questions closed with a custom off-topic reason. Anecdotally, I think most of these are on story-id questions.
But despite its popularity, I'm leery of canonizing this close reason; it seems lazy, and I'm not convinced we have the volume of "not worth the effort" questions to justify it.
The goal of the off-topic closure is three-fold:
Make it clear to the poster why their question is off-topic. In the words of the OP of the above-linked question, we want to:
minimize frustration and reduce the misperception that they’re just being “picked on for being a noob”
Incentivize improvement. Again, in the words of the above-linked OP:
we want the language and workflow to encourage editing wherever possible (and in particular, to make improving a post seem more logical than arguing that it shouldn’t have been closed.)
The close reason shouldn't rely on outside information, like the help pages.
In my mind, the "not science fiction or fantasy" close reason only accomplishes one of those, or perhaps two in a small subset of cases:
This is maybe arguable, but it provides the bare minimum of information. As I see it, there are three types of questions where this close reason would apply:
Questions that, yeah, are obviously not SFF. Custom message box in c# language (visible to 10k+ users only), which was migrated to StackOverflow (because of course it was) would be one example of this as would spam questions.
In this case, I can see that having the canon close reason would help us save time on questions that really aren't worth it However, although I don't have hard stats, I believe this is still a minority of cases
Story-id questions where there's no obvious SFF elements. You could perhaps make an argument for this one, but I don't know how often it really applies, and in any case I don't think it's wise to have a dedicated close reason that's only really valid for a single tag.
Questions where the community has decided that the work (or genre) is off-topic; the recent crackdown on spy-fi springs to mind, as does the longstanding issue with religious works.
The problem I have with this case is that, ideally, we should be explaining why the question isn't considered SFF for our purposes. Since this is already a major source of "picking on me" complaints, I'm not sure adding to that is a good idea
Complete failure. Saying "this is not science fiction or fantasy" offers no guidance for improving the question.
I will grant that the more legitimate uses of this close reason focus on questions that are unsalvageable, but I'm not yet convinced we have enough of those to justify the canonized close reason.
Well, yes. Except in the case of community-driven decisions about something being off-topic, where we should (I think) be linking back to Meta, the close reason is definitely self-contained.
Bottom line: I don't think the close reason does a good enough job fulfilling the goals of off-topic closure. There might be a case for it when we have a higher volume of questions that are just beyond saving, but I don't think we're at that point yet.
1 Aside from suggestions to migrate to M&TV, but there's only two of those