I think all the meta questions about this close reason have the general-reference tag, you can browse them to see the history and discussion around this topic.
We've usually taken “general reference” to mean “obvious from the Wikipedia article”. We don't use it much; I think we average about once a month.
I do like having the close reason, and I miss it on other SE sites, but I have concerns about it being misused. In particular, I disagree with Borror0's diagram (pushed by Jeff): I don't think Google is a good test for general reference. I won't repeat my full reasoning here. The problem with the Google test is that often the top Google hits look good to potential answerers who know the topic well, but what the asker sees is an explanation that's difficult to understand and may or may not be correct or relevant. This is the crux of the problem: general reference implies that not only the asker can find the answer easily, but the asker must know that they have found a reliable answer. The short version is that general reference should not be “Google it” but “Wikipede it”.
On sites without general reference as a close reason, I sometimes vote to close as “too localized: This question is unlikely to ever help any future visitors.” Although the examples in the description of the “too localized” close reason don't apply, general reference questions are bad primarily because they are not helpful to future visitors: future visitors with the same question will have an easier time looking up the answer in the general reference than on Stack Exchange, so there's no need to duplicate the information on Stack Exchange.