The question in question: Why is Che Guevara so famous?
It is not about:
- Questions answered by a simple Google search or to be found in a Wikipedia page
While it might not always be obvious if a question is easily answered by a trivial search, I think it's painfully obvious that the question in question shows absolutely no prior effort, something that is generally required for questions on Stack Exchange sites.
Furthermore the question, as phrased, is not really asking for historical facts, but more seeking a discussion on the fame (or infamy) of Che Guevara. Even if it is on topic, it reads like an extremely not constructive question, and just for reference the not constructive close reason reads as:
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or specific expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion.
The first answer seems to prove that the question is very attractive to argumentative debate (and it's already generated a ton of off topic comments). It's horribly biased, and it reads more like something I would expect to read on the author's personal blog than on a high quality canonical resource on history. I'm not questioning the author's opinions and I don't necessarily disagree with him (her?), but I am questioning whether opinion heavy answers is what the site is for.
The other answer is presented in a impartial way, but also doesn't really answer the question.
Nothing personal with either answerer, my peeve is with the question. I can completely understand how answerers couldn't resist the urge to answer such a question, but I really think that so poor questions can only lead to argumentative answers and are not the best advertisement for the site. The question is at +6, and other than featuring prominently on the front page it has been (automatically) twitted, giving (imho) a wrong impression for the site.
In another question that seems to be suffering from the same issues, Why is King Henry V regarded as such a great King?, choster comments (emphasis mine):
You are perfectly free not to regard Henry V as a great man because his actions offend your modern moral sensibilities. History is not the discipline of applying the lens of modern morality to historical figures.
Related Meta discussions:
- Please avoid asking Wikipedia questions
- Are recent political history questions on topic?
- No-research questions
- Flamebait questions are not always intended that way