There is a question on the main site whether trace amounts of onions can be harmful to pets. It's been closed as a duplicate of whether onions can be harmful in general despite the OP specifically referring to that question prompting his.
I understand the OP's reason for asking. If onions are harmful, does that mean I can't feed my dog any table scraps at all if they might contain even a hint of onion?
But despite it being worthwhile asking and different from the duplicate, John Cavan's comment points out that any answer would probably be too broad or opinion-based, so it would likely get closed for those reasons.
The question is, should we care whether this question is closed for the wrong reason as long as it is closed? I'd say yes, because closed questions serve the purpose of helping to define boundaries. Closing this one as duplicate, in my opinion, comes across as if we didn't actually engage with the question and closed it because it sounded vaguely like another question.
Closing it as too broad (because it'd be different for every dog) or opinion-based (because there might be no studies on the exact amounts per kg body weight) or even off-topic (because we allow general medical advice but not specific) show that we've really engaged with OP and his question.
