The question in question is this one:
Why are vampires not rotten like other undead?
I know of no zombie/vampire fiction where this isn't the case. That means a trope/genre type answer should be of narrow enough scope to answer it.
Yes I did answer it, but I'm also interested as I like these sort of questions (when done well).
See this current meta question:
The problem with broad questions is that they encourage two sorts of answers;
The "Choose Your Own Universe" strategy is one where users answer the question based on the fictional universes with which they're most familiar, ignoring all others.
While this is kinda fun for those answering, the odds are that by selecting a narrow range of examples, the answer is going to fail to take account of the wider picture.
The next person then comes along and makes the same mistake and you end up with what you've got on that question, a total dog's breakfast of answers referencing Bram Stoker's Dracula, Twilight, Peeps(?), Anita Blake, The Dresden Files and The Vampire Diaries as well as several zombie flicks like Dawn of the Dead.
Broad questions practically invite people to dispute the question by posting answers based on an 'edge-cases', usually quoting from an obscure show/book that hardly anyone's heard of. These answers aren't actually answering the question in any meaningful sense, they're simply poking holes in it, which is possible because the OP has opened the question up to every vampire book/film/play/TV show ever written.
As regards the question in question, your answer may well be the best of a bad lot, but it's not actually an answer to the question asked. You've written a really good answer to the question "Why are vampires not portrayed as rotten in Bram Stoker's Dracula". which, ironically would be very much on-topic and a much more interesting question to boot.
I don't believe it is too broad.
Disclaimer: I don't particularly like the question. I think it is borderline downvote-worthy (little research).
However, I don't think it should be closed.
The existing answers all provide relevant information that may be of interest to visitors browsing.
I believe there is a fundamental difference of opinion within this site, which has roots going back to the beta.
Some users seem to enjoy subjective, but thought-provoking questions. Others seem to want to adhere closer to the standard SE model of solving actual, real world problems.
I would prefer that, short of a clear consensus, we err on the side of being more permissive, out of respect to those who enjoy these types of questions. Those who don't should feel free to downvote or move on. They don't seem to be frequent enough to cause a significant problem.
So long as questions don't fall under our more clear-cut close reasons (duplicate, off-topic, unclear, opinion-based), I think we should leave these types of questions open pending a solid community definition of "too broad" that goes beyond the stock wording:
There are either too many possible answers, or good answers would be too long for this format. Please add details to narrow the answer set or to isolate an issue that can be answered in a few paragraphs.
