Yes I think you are right: I was pleased to see your knowing about the CW feature, and using it.
CW can be useful, for building reference lists, for example:
Incidentally, the authors have done more than only convert these topics to CW:
- To deal with the problem of indexing/sorting, the former (list of bicycle terminology) puts each entry in a separate 'answer' and edits the 'question' so that the question has an alphabetical list of links to each entry
- To make the answer coherent, the latter (list of C++ books) deletes every answer except one, locks the topic so that new answers can't be added, and edits every reply into the single common answer
Also some reference lists are less useful than others: for example, IMO What are some entertaining/fictional movies, books, etc. might be too broad a topic (too many possible answers and not enough value e.g. commentary/context added to each answer, so it's a mere list of lists).
But, whether a topic is ...
- Just right (i.e. normal)
- Ought to be CW (i.e. unusual)
- Ought to be closed (i.e. too unusual)
... is a bit subjective, a judgement call. For example although I thought that asking "What are some entertaining/fictional movies" was too broad, I thought that my own question "Chronological or other sequence for beginners" was helpful even though it too attracted a list of lists in reply.
There used to be a chat room in which to mention Dharma Books. People on this site don't use the chat rooms enough to keep them unfrozen.