If a question title is :
'Why do Hindus eat beef daily?'
There are 2 things here - an assumption that Hindus eat beef daily. and a question about its reason.
This could come from 2 types of people - the misinformed. and the malicious.
So, those users who know enough about Hindus, will answer - 'They don't eat beef at all, forget daily.'
However, for a stray user browsing this site, if they simply look at the question title, and move on to other questions or close the site, then they are left with a possible assumption that Hindus eat beef.
But, if we edit to question to 'Do Hindus eat beef daily? If so, why?' - then the passerby user is left with a possible doubt whether Hindus eat beef.
I think this is a significant enough difference to warrant an edit.
I see many 'opinionated' or 'misinformed' questions that start with 'WHY DOES', when the answer is 'IT DOESN'T'
For e.g. this one Why does Makar Sankranti follow English calendar? , I removed the 'Why', but it got rolled back with reason 'intent should not be changed'. Why should intent not be changed ? I understand that, for the OP, changing the intent might affect him. But this site is not 1-1 private advice. All questions and answers are public.
e.g.2. This question - How powerful is Pashupatastra? originally said 'Why is Pashupatastra overrated?', which is obviously opinionated question, and I didn't want to remove the 'Why' because that still leaves it opinionated, so I edited it to its current form.
If we are able to cast doubt upon a misinformation at the question level, and then squash the misinformation at the answer level, what's wrong with that ?