The problem with this usage of "Proofreading" is that the close text pretty much tells people "go away, your question is bad and doesn't belong here".
Proofreading questions are off-topic unless a specific source of concern in the text is clearly identified. See: Alternative websites for proofreading
Proofreading is someone posting an entire sentence or paragraph (or more) of text and asking us to tell them what, if anything, is wrong with it.
A question in the form:
Of the two options X and Y which is correct?
This is not proofreading.
"Do you know what time does the film begin?" vs "Do you know what time the film begins?"
- Do you know what time does the film begin?
- Do you know what time the film begins?
Which one is correct?
The "specific source of concern" is pretty darn obvious here... there's only one difference between the two sentences. One uses "does" and the other does not.
This certainly could benefit from some more detail... but we have a close reason for that. In fact, we have two.
The SE generic "Unclear what you're asking text":
Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question.
The ELL-specific text with an extremely helpful "how to improve your question link":
This question should include more details than have been provided here. Please edit to add the research you have done in your efforts to answer the question, or provide more context. See: Details, Please.
Either of these two close options are opening a dialogue and inviting the OP to edit his question and, particularly in the case of the latter, providing some resources that explain how to improve the question. They are both infinitely better than the proofreading close reason which should only be used rarely and in very obvious cases of proofreading.
I'm honestly tired enough of seeing this happen that I'm about to recommend ditching the "Proofreading" reason. Yes, it is a useful reason and there certainly are questions that deserve it. The overuse is really driving me batty, though.
Short of that, here are some options:
Perhaps we can rearrange the Close reasons so that the "Unclear" option is first and the "proofreading" option is last. Perhaps it will make it more obvious that it's a favored reason for closing.
Rewrite the close reason for proofreading so that it's more obvious what we mean by "proofreading" and it will be less likely to be misused. The current wording is clearly somewhat ambiguous.
Rewrite the close reason for the "this needs more details" to emphasize the purpose... start with bold text to make it more visible.
In the meantime, when you see something with CVs for "Proofreading" that aren't proofreading, please comment on them and consider posting the "Details, Please" link so that, even if it does get closed, the OP has a resource to go to so that he can improve the question and get it reopened.
I think that at least part of the problem is that users who CV will often hop on the bandwagon of "Oh, this already has CV for this reason, so I'll do that one, too"... If they see a comment saying "this is not Proofreading", they may opt for a different close reason.