At Getting rid of the popular science tag, Shog9's (rather reasonable, in my opinion) was accepted. So here, I think we should standardise the definition of popular-science.
If the answers are technical, but the question was phrased in a pop-sci way, should it be tagged as popular science?
If the questioner asks for something evidently beyond their level (assuming they're a layman), should it be tagged a pop-sci?
If the question arose from a pop-sci text, e.g. one of Kaku's pop-sci books, but asks for a technical answer (e.g. Kaku says that it's possible to find the probability of X happening but as it was in the context of a pop-sci book, so he didn't elaborate any further. How is that done?" , should it be tagged as pop-sci?
Are questions about, say, "Which is the fastest way to cool a beaker of water?" to be tagged as pop-sci? Or is it just stuff like "How can a graviton escape a black hole?"?
From the comments:
These are just suggestions - the intent is for people to suggest a good definition in the answers, the community votes on these answers, and the most upvoted one after a reasonable amount of time has past will be the one we apply.
Note that whatever definition you come up with needs to be objective. Otherwise we're back where we've started on the tag. "Question was phrased in a pop sci way" is ambiguous.