Well, the question will be asked at the level that the questioner best understands. Hopefully, they will put enough effort into the question to ensure that it is, at whatever level, unambiguous and reasonably comprehensive.
That much is really beyond our control.
What is within the communities' control is the ability to edit the question to draw out the essence of the issue, or refine the point of the question, providing that doesn't substantially alter the original intent.
If it is apparent that the questioner's level of understanding of the problem is sufficiently constrained that only a radical rewrite of the question would adequately expose the actual issue in a way that would support meaningful and helpful answers, I would propose closing the question ("Unclear what you are asking" or "Too broad") and leaving a comment explaining that the question needs to be significantly reworked and why.
Should the OP take up the offer to rewrite the question, their initial efforts could then be edited by others. Should they decline, the question could be deleted with no real loss to the wiki.
If the original (obscured) issue was something that did merit its own question, anyone involved in the aforementioned exchange could write it up.
Note that I haven't addressed the issue of the number of views; I don't consider that an end in itself, but a byproduct of interesting questions, or those that just happen to strike a chord with people here. Playing to the crowd is a short term strategy, and one that has its own peculiar risks.
Lots of popular questions will have a superficial appeal, but are unlikely to sustain the interest of the sorts of diverse specialist knowledge that this community is very fortunate to enjoy. We should be working to maintain a diverse *nix knowledge ecosystem, not the neckbeard linkbait-y equivalent of Gawker.