I have thought about this and I think I raised a similar question on meta at some point, or at least wrote half of the question out and didn't end up finishing it. I think that it's a good idea to have a question like this and I think it can work with or without the community wiki style answers.
There's a long history of discussion on this site about what direction questions should go, whether having a proclivity towards academic philosophy and well sourced answers are better than the opposite (I am of the opinion that the former is better), but I don't think going into the details of that discussion is necessary for this question. What I do think is that it is very apparent that when an average person who hasn't been exposed to rigorous philosophy thinks of the field of philosophy, some of the questions they instantly associate with it are questions such as "what is the meaning of life?" "who are we?" "where are we going?" and other similarly novel questions like "if a tree falls in the forest when no one is around it, does it make a sound?" Those are questions that the average person thinks are philosophical (which, in a strong way, they are) and I think that it would be a smart decision to have those questions on this site.
In the case of "if a tree falls in the forest when no one is around it, does it make a sound?", someone asked that question or at least something similar some time last year I believe, and in an answer I tried to show them that the philosophical aspect of that question has to do with definitions. We know that physical interactions cause vibrations in the air, we know that if a tree falls those vibrations will happen, so the only part of the question that needs to be sorted out is whether or not "sound" refers to those vibrations or to the act of some sense organ picking those vibrations up and a mind processing them. So, what I tried to point out is that the philosophical import of that question isn't whether or not there's a sound, the import is in that question being an example of how philosophy uses analysis and careful understanding and setting forth of definitions in order to answer questions. It's sort of like a case study in using philosophical analysis, the question vanishes once we're clear on what we mean by "sound", and that's the lesson of the question. I think that having a question that asks "if a tree falls in the forest when no one is around it, does it make a sound?" and having an answer that explains what I've just stated is valuable for this site, because that question is a very common question that the average person associates with philosophy. As I recall (I may be wrong, it was a long time ago), that question was closed because people viewed it as being a question about definitions and English, and not an actual question about philosophy. I agree that at face value it's a question about definitions, but that in and of itself is exactly why it's philosophical, it's a case study in philosophical analysis of language and concepts.
I feel the exact same way when it comes to "what is the meaning of life?" It's a question that is very often associated with philosophy by the average person, even if they don't understand how difficult of a question it is to answer and how much work goes into formulating a concrete philosophical argument about it. I think that a detailed answer that contextualizes that specific question's place in philosophy and gives examples, with a large amount of sources and quotes and everything else that a good objective answer about a humanities question should have, is both achievable and overall beneficial for the site. A community wiki would be a great format for that type of answer.
However, even if people were still disposed towards objecting to this question and saying that a contextualizing answer wouldn't answer the real question or wouldn't be good enough of an answer, I think that we can mask the purported lack of objectivity by putting it under the "Summer Silly" tag. Here and here we've talked about having a certain period during the summer where silly, less serious questions about philosophy are allowed to be asked in good spirit, and I think that questions like "what is the meaning of life" and "if a tree falls in the forest when no one is around it, does it make a sound?" are the exact type of questions that fall under this heading. Sure, it's not summer right now, but I believe that we can make an exception to the time frame given the nature of this question. Maybe we could even introduce a different tag instead of summer silly, something like "colloquial philosophy" to specifically refer to these types of questions. Of course there is instantly the problem of adjudicating when a question is "colloquially philosophical", people will disagree about specifics, and there would need to be a larger discussion about it before any sort of implementation could take place, but that's another thought at least.
So, to recapitulate, I believe that this is an important question that is considered to be the definition of a philosophical question by a large amount of the global population; I believe that a very strong objective answer is achievable by contextualizing the question in the history of philosophy and making sure to provide a large amount of sources and quotations (this, I believe, would be good to do as a community wiki style answer); and even if people object to the idea of the question as not being objective enough, there is the option of putting under an alternative tag that lets everybody know the specific nature of the question and the answers and that the usual quality of objectivity that is aimed for might not be possible in this case.
I am very curious to hear people's responses to this, especially the moderators'. One objection that I perfectly accept is that even if we do have this platonic ideal answer that I've loosely described, there will still be a large amount of people writing their own subjective and personal answers to the question. Does labeling it a summer silly question absolve those subjective answers? Maybe not, but I am very interested in opinions on this option.
