As I read the meta page, I see increasing number of "Should we allow...?" questions.
We're in a phase when we are creating rules about the site. The natural reaction is that we see a question which arises our doubt - seems poorly written, barely on topic, common knowledge, not specific enough - and our reaction is to write a meta asking if we should make a rule regarding this type of questions.
Which is fine and dandy if there's a bunch of the questions like this one really cluttering the site and we are really helping set shape to it.
But if this is a single question unlikely to reappear in another year, we should take a step back. We are creating a rule. Something there to stay, something to be learned by all who want to keep contributing to this site meaningfully.
If we make the corpus of rules too big, very few will ever want to learn it. Important rules will go unnoticed because the user reading a twentieth minor peeve forbidden will just stop reading and trying to remember.
So, before you ask whether given type of questions should be allowed or forbidden, take a step back and consider whether given type of questions is worth being regulated at all.
If they are to appear once a year, maintaining the general rule will be more hassle and introduce more disorder (by making the whole corpus of rules harder to learn) than deciding if the question belongs, ad-hoc and case-by-case.