General Reference is not well-liked on SF.SE.

Among other things, there's little agreement on what "standard Internet reference source" means. Wikipedia and IMdB are about the only widely accepted reference sites. There was a rancorous discussion recently of whether a Google was a true "reference" site i.e. if a question is well-answered by the top 5-10 hits of a Google search (but none of those are Wikipedia) is it GR?

The most recent in-depth discussion includes an answer from Shog9 indicating that GR is likely to go away.

Another answer includes this reasoning, which makes sense to me:

Why is it not sufficient to say "if a question is trivial, boring, and demonstrates little to no research, downvote it"? Note that the hover-text for downvoting states quite clearly that a question or answer should be downvoted when it "does not show any research effort" or "it is unclear or not useful"!

Downvote it and move on!

General Reference is not well-liked on SF.SE.

Among other things, there's little agreement on what "standard Internet reference source" means. Wikipedia and IMdB are about the only widely accepted reference sites. There was a rancorous discussion recently of whether a Google was a true "reference" site i.e. if a question is well-answered by the top 5-10 hits of a Google search (but none of those are Wikipedia) is it GR?

The most recent in-depth discussion includes an answer from Shog9 indicating that GR is likely to go away.

Another answer includes this reasoning, which makes sense to me:

Why is it not sufficient to say "if a question is trivial, boring, and demonstrates little to no research, downvote it"? Note that the hover-text for downvoting states quite clearly that a question or answer should be downvoted when it "does not show any research effort" or "it is unclear or not useful"!

Downvote it and move on!

General Reference is not well-liked on SF.SE. Among other things, there's little agreement on what "standard Internet reference source" means. (Wikipedia is about the only widely accepted reference site.)

The most recent in-depth discussion includes an answer from Shog9 indicating that GR is likely to go away.

Another answer includes this reasoning, which makes sense to me:

Why is it not sufficient to say "if a question is trivial, boring, and demonstrates little to no research, downvote it"? Note that the hover-text for downvoting states quite clearly that a question or answer should be downvoted when it "does not show any research effort" or "it is unclear or not useful"!

Downvote it and move on!

General Reference is not well-liked on SF.SE.

Among other things, there's little agreement on what "standard Internet reference source" means. Wikipedia and IMdB are about the only widely accepted reference sites. There was a rancorous discussion recently of whether a Google was a true "reference" site i.e. if a question is well-answered by the top 5-10 hits of a Google search (but none of those are Wikipedia) is it GR?

The most recent in-depth discussion includes an answer from Shog9 indicating that GR is likely to go away.

Another answer includes this reasoning, which makes sense to me:

Why is it not sufficient to say "if a question is trivial, boring, and demonstrates little to no research, downvote it"? Note that the hover-text for downvoting states quite clearly that a question or answer should be downvoted when it "does not show any research effort" or "it is unclear or not useful"!

Downvote it and move on!