user9943: I had an interesting debate elsewhere on SE about closing poorly researched questions. Basically the consensus came down to the following meta posts:

Embrace the non-Googlers 
How should we deal with Google questions?

Based on this one could conclude that part of the SE goal is to 

...link Google searches to somewhere useful. By answering questions properly, instead of saying 'just Google it', you hopefully set up a definitive answer that Google will find for evermore.


Why then is Biology.SE so keen on throwing out basic questions that are Google'able? 
Isn't everyone answering questions primarily through a Google search? How many questions did you answer without it? Aren't we throwing babies away with the bathwater?
Aren't we overusing the close voting based on homework grounds?
Was the over-closing perhaps born out of the urge to get out of beta? Shouldn't we abandon this strategy therefore since we are graduated? 

I know how How do I ask a good question? is defined and see How much should we enforce background research?, but I found the excessive use of "Have you done any research?" in answer to questions food for thought nonetheless.

user10456: I believe this is a case of the help vampire issue, first identified in this post.
Quote from article follows (emphases mine):

Identifying Help Vampires can be tricky, because they look like any ordinary person (or Internet user, whichever is lesser). But by closely observing an individual's behavior using this handy checklist, you too can identify Help Vampires in the field:

Do they ask the same, tired questions others ask (at a rate of once or more per minute)?
Do they clearly lack the ability or inclination to ask the almighty Google?
Do they refuse to take the time to ask coherent, specific questions?
Do they think helping them must be the high point of your day?
Do they get offensive, as if you needed to prove them why they should use Ruby on Rails?
Are they obviously just waiting for some poor, well-intentioned person to do all their thinking for them?
Can you tell they really aren't interested in having their question answered, so much as getting someone else to do their work?


All of the cases which I emphasised have something to do with the issue of poorly researched questions. They cause a large host of issues with the site, and should be shot down whenever possible, as this would damage the community otherwise.
As MattDMo has said in the comments, I also believe that the text of the homework close should be changed to better reflect the text of the homework policy, which states the reasons in better detail.

9943: <p>I had an interesting debate <a href="https://cogsci.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1056/should-we-close-poorly-researched-questions">elsewhere</a> on SE about closing poorly researched questions. Basically the consensus came down to the following meta posts:</p>

<ul>
<li><a href="https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5280/embrace-the-non-googlers">Embrace the non-Googlers</a>  </li>
<li><a href="https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8724/how-should-we-deal-with-google-questions">How should we deal with Google questions?</a></li>
</ul>

<p>Based on this one could <a href="https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8724/how-should-we-deal-with-google-questions/8729#8729">conclude</a> that <a href="http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/09/15.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">part of the SE goal</a> is to </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>...link Google searches to somewhere useful. By answering questions properly, instead of saying 'just Google it', you hopefully set up a definitive answer that Google will find for evermore.</p>
</blockquote>

<ul>
<li>Why then is Biology.SE so keen on throwing out basic questions that are Google'able? </li>
<li>Isn't everyone answering questions primarily through a Google search? How many questions did <em>you</em> answer without it? Aren't we throwing babies away with the bathwater?</li>
<li>Aren't we overusing the close voting based on homework grounds?</li>
<li>Was the over-closing perhaps born out of the urge to get out of beta? Shouldn't we abandon this strategy therefore since we are graduated? </li>
</ul>

<p>I know how <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask">How do I ask a good question?</a> is defined and see <a href="https://biology.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/449/how-much-should-we-enforce-background-research?rq=1">How much should we enforce background research?</a>, but I found the excessive use of "Have you done <em>any</em> research?" in answer to questions food for thought nonetheless.</p>
 10456: <p>I believe this is a case of the <a href="https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/19665/the-help-vampire-problem">help vampire issue</a>, first identified in <a href="http://slash7.com/2006/12/22/vampires/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this post</a>.</p>
<p>Quote from article follows (emphases mine):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Identifying Help Vampires can be tricky, because they look like any ordinary person (or Internet user, whichever is lesser). But by closely observing an individual's behavior using this handy checklist, you too can identify Help Vampires in the field:</p>
<ul>
<li>Do they ask the same, tired questions others ask (at a rate of once or more per minute)?</li>
<li>Do they <strong>clearly lack the ability or inclination to ask the almighty Google</strong>?</li>
<li>Do they <strong>refuse to take the time to ask coherent, specific questions</strong>?</li>
<li>Do they think helping them must be the high point of your day?</li>
<li>Do they get offensive, as if you needed to prove them why they should use Ruby on Rails?</li>
<li>Are they <strong>obviously just waiting for some poor, well-intentioned person to do all their thinking for them</strong>?</li>
<li>Can you tell they really aren't interested in having their question answered, so much as <strong>getting someone else to do their work</strong>?</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p>All of the cases which I emphasised have something to do with the issue of poorly researched questions. They cause a large host of issues with the site, and should be shot down whenever possible, as this would damage the community otherwise.</p>
<p>As MattDMo has said in the comments, I also believe that the text of the homework close should be changed to better reflect the text of the homework policy, which states the reasons in better detail.</p>
