Update: It seems that my reading of the meta post linked was incorrect, we aren't able to change the text in the way proposed, alas.
In the reopen review queue we often deal with questions which have been closed as opinion-based, the notice reads:
Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations. This will help others answer the question.
Admittedly, from the queue itself, the wording is slightly different, but the requirement to be answered with "facts and citations" is the same.
I suddenly realised that they weren't the criteria I encountered quite a bit as a close reason - opinion-based, yes, but for the reason that no clear path to a "best answer" was specified.
Whilst "facts and citations" might be fine for many (even a majority) of questions, a substantial minority are not like that.
Questions about magic, or balancing-magic-systems such as How Would I Justify Keeping Most Magic Away from the General Public if it is Technically Learnable by Everyone? or How do I nerf a magic system empowered by emotion? seem to need a notice which jars less with the sense of what the question needs to be made on-topic.
The wording might be changed to something more general and fitting like:
Update the question to include sufficient criteria so answers can be objectively ranked.
As per the suggestion on main meta, I'm asking for opinions, thoughts, better wording suggestions?