Disclaimer: I asked this question a long time ago, but since I now have higher rep and more experience with this site - I longer support the opinion I express in this question.
Currently, I am a member of the Writing, History, and ELU Stack Exchanges. What I've noticed in History and ELU, is that the general guideline is to provide evidence when you answer a question. That makes sense, you can't just go around answering questions with zero evidence, facts, links, etc, It would cause bursts of users trying to gain mass reputation points by giving half credible answers.
Why, in Writing Stack Exchange, is there not this rule? Not that I am seeing half credible answers all over the place, but I am seeing answers based on opinion without any evidence to support their answer. Obviously, this can be a case by case scenario, some questions are more opinionated than others.
To stop these open-ended answers, like what has been pointed out by other Writing Meta users, we need to cut back open-ended questions that do not require an answer with facts, like opinion questions.
How can we support answers that give credible links, include facts, and have evidence of research and support of their answer?
I do understand that Writing is different than History, as there can be multiple right answers. But this is no excuse for answers like yes/no, only supported by opinion.
However, I do understand that there are some good answers that can be supported by things like personal experience, and more of a broader point of view rather than specific facts and evidence.
Like I said before, how can we improve the community to support answers with credible facts and evidence, not just an open ended opinion.