Responding to Jean-Marie Prival's comment that some answers cannot have references because of them being subjective - even in those answers it is still possible to include references that explain the problem and show where the current state of research is. I have done this in a quite a few of my answers where typically OP asks a world building climate change scenario question. One can also bring in references to scientific blogs and popular science articles.
The real issue here is that some people have found a way to break the SE rating/points system i.e. a way to gain a very high reputation without citing a single reference and I think that needs to be tackled separately.
In the answers to this closed question - In which state of matter exactly are the clouds (can only be one of the three stages [closed] I have been told very politely in the comments that references are not needed for this particular question by a couple of people.
May I politely and respectfully disagree. First of all meteorology and atmospheric science is still a young field and sophisticated observations available via remote sensing confirm what we do know. Certainly I do not recall that cirrus clouds were composed of ice when I was introduced to different types of clouds in high school.
High flying aircraft having particle sampling instruments and satellite radars(CloudSat and GPM) have confirmed this so called "textbook" fact.
If I were answering that question I would most definitely try to provide a more modern perspective(depending on OP's background).
TLDR It is not all hand waving and it is not all wikipedia.