I don't believe the purpose of the 'multiple questions' close reason is to close any question that strictly includes more than one question mark. Yet that seems to be the way it is often interpreted.
For example:
Yes, there are two questions, but it seems clear to me that they are part of one overall equiry, which could be paraphrased as 'why is the provided answer the correct answer?'.
The last thing we would want, after all, is for the questionner to post the same quotation twice asking almost identical questions.
This practice, again, seems to reflect a pattern of using almost any reason to close as many questions as possible, rather than a moderately charitable interpretation of the rules to maximize the usefulness of the site to learners.
Should we not encourage reviewers to give some benefit of the doubt to the posters? Closing questions just because you can be on a strict technicality is counterproductive to the purpose of the site, it seems to me.
Again, I don't want to provoke a huge argument (as I know I recently posted a different, but related, question), but I find a large proportion of the close queue doesn't come close to deserving closure according to my judgement, unless the objective is to 'close as much as possible'.
