While I don't wish to sound ungrateful for your recognition of the problem and desire to find a solution, I think this specific proposed solution would actually be worse than the current situation.
There are some great Community Wiki questions out there, like What's a nice explanation for pointers? or Options for HTML scraping?. It would be a shame to exclude those solely on the basis of that flag. But more importantly, Community Wiki is not supposed to be an indicator of the quality or appropriate-ness of the question, and many people across the network have worked very hard over the past several months to impart that understanding in the various communities.
The Community Wiki button was taken away from questions because it was abused as a justification for open-ended, non-constructive questions. There is a ton of literature on this topic now, all the way from Good Subjective, Bad Subjective to Real Questions Have Answers to The Future of Community Wiki. The overarching message being repeated again and again is that discussion and poll threads are not appropriate under any banner and that Community Wiki is principally meant for answers that need expansion or improvement by the community (think of Wikipedia's "stubs").
Sure, this rule would get rid of the poll questions from the Multicollider™ and so on, but as a policy/feature, it's a return to the dark ages, a new legitimate reason for people to demand that their borderline questions merely be turned into Community Wiki rather than closed.
With so many sites on the network, I think we need to start treating these inter-site promotional tools like common areas in a condo building. OK, you guys, moderators and community movements, you get to decide on the scope of your site, how to position it, how to handle things like tagging and comment cleanup and contests. But, just because I own my unit doesn't mean I'm allowed to put a BBQ on the balcony, and just because individual sites have a certain level of autonomy doesn't mean you should feel free to openly allow questions that flagrantly subvert network-wide policies, in the absence of some seriously crazy extenuating circumstances.
If you see a question getting 83 upvotes and 46 answers, you should close it. That is at the very least a red flag, a "question smell". If a question has 46 distinct answers then that really means it has no answer and isn't a question at all. That's not good for any community trying to position itself as a place for Q&A. You give one set of exceptions on one site and everybody else on every site will want special exceptions for their crappy questions as well.
We see a lot of goofy questions appearing on a fairly regular basis in the network ads, but those questions, while "fun", are also real questions most of the time, and their creators deserve some credit for being able to write a question that's fun and educational. These "little things that make you smile" threads are, I'm sorry to say, not in that category. They're little podiums for community members to get up and brag and rave about their newest consumer product acquisition. I don't see how they're practical and no, it's not just me hating on Apple, I feel very much the same way about the (mostly closed/locked) "hidden features" questions and feature wishlist questions that seem to pop up again and again on most sites.
People will ask them anyway, that's to be expected, but you should have the good sense to close them - if not right away then certainly after they've run their course and have more than 15-20 answers. That's the most effective solution to this problem; not to make yet another special exception for popular non-questions.