Yeah, that question maybe shouldn't have been closed, but it's also not a great question. The real problem is your understanding of how closing questions works in reality.
There are limited number of canned close reasons. It is possible to do some extra clicking, then clear out some annoying pre-written text, then write a custom message for closing. However, there are real people performing this work, on their own time, while they'd rather be doing something else like answering good questions. Therefore, people will often click on the nearest handy close reason that looks even remotely right (or not).
I vaguely remember seeing this question originally. Here is what I think were my thoughts at the time:
- No, I'm not going to follow a link. Question level adjusted from 0 to -1.
- VSWR is not defined. I think he means voltage standing wave ratio, but it's kindof arrogant to assume everyone knows that, -2. This is probably a very common acronym in this particular sub-field, but that doesn't help anyone who might be unsure or is new to the field. It also reduces search hits if someone spells it out. It's just plain lazy. Let's make that -3.
- Why voltage ratio. These things are usually express in dB. What specific case is there here that makes the voltage ratio more illuminating than the power ratio expressed in dB the usual way? This is going to be a hassle getting the details for a useful answer. Does this guy realize how small a voltage ratio of 1.4 expressed in db actually is? Maybe he's deliberately using these units to make the problem seem bigger? -4 now.
- He's asking whether a matching network could be used. So wait, does he know what he's doing or not? At first it sounded like he did, but this is now a question at a lower level. If a answer mentions a Smith chart, is it going to be met with a lot more questions? Hmm, the correct answer would simply be "yes". That might be fun if I had more time right now.
- Now he's asking about which end of the feed line the matching network could go. That's a good question, but the answer will need to get into the impedance of the transmission line, mismatches at each end, and too much theory that will be hard to write in a reasonable answer.
Now keep in mind that it took much longer to explain this thought process than to perform it. I spent maybe 10 seconds on this question and then thought to myself "Nah, I've got better things to do.".
I don't think this question is worthy of being closed, but I'm not going to defend it if it is. It's not that it's off topic, but that it's not a great question. However, explaining all the true reasons would be too much trouble. If I were to close, I'd probably just pick unclear.
If it got closed for some other reason, oh well. The fault is with the OP for not taking some care in asking the question. If he doesn't get the exact feedback about why, then again, oh well. If he'd taken a little more care he wouldn't be in this position. This site isn't a game to see exactly how bad a question you can get away with.
Sometimes I've thought questions should be closed with as little explanation as possible. The message would be "Bad question. Go read the rules.". When they don't know where exactly the line is, they'll be extra careful not to cross it.