I think we should discourage questions and answers that cite no other references. Nearly as bad are the ones that insert a Wikipedia reference as the sole reference. Of course, a reference request, or a genuinely novel question may well merit not referencing anything else, or using an unspecific reference. But I think we are trying to do science here, not gauge who can correctly type a phrase into the Wikipedia search box. I think Wikipedia links add a lot of value in providing definitions for terms, when a background pointer is needed, or when referring to a particular proof technique that is used in a Wikipedia article. But when discussing specific results, I would prefer to see a greater use of primary sources, and evaluation of the content instead of just a pointer. Otherwise what value are we adding over Wikipedia or Google Scholar? Please note that I am one of the several contributors here who also actively contribute to Wikipedia, so I am not anti-Wikipedia. But it would be nice to see a depth of answers here that goes beyond a general encyclopaedia.