Thank you for bringing this problem to our attention. We appreciate that you disagree with how many users have voted on some things. I agree that this site's quality would improve hundredfold if one person decided which answers would be upvoted and downvoted. A benevolent dictatorship, if you will.
But, that's not how Stack Exchange works, now is it? You cannot control how other users vote, no matter how hard you meta.
I actually find it hilarious that you bring up StackOverflow as your shining example that all Stack Exchange sites should be more like. (I will address ElitistJerks in a second) StackOverflow does a lot to remove low quality content, sure, but there is a sheer volume of content that comes into StackOverflow, that the review queues regularly have multitudes of posts awaiting review. Around here, the queues are regularly empty. They are more strict about things therefore, because they would be literally buried in a mountain of bad content otherwise.
There are also more users who specialize in a multitude of different programming areas, whereas I, for one, am not comfortable voting either way on a League of Legends answer simply because I don't know the game. Nor would I even bother to look at said League of Legends answer, because I have no reason to read it.
Non-answers are deleted all the time. I regularly see them in the review queues, and recommend their deletion. Incorrect answers are a more complicated matter altogether. In general a flag against an incorrect answer that is still an answer will be declined or disputed (depending on the flag handler). Incorrect accepted answers have been deleted in the past, but it's atypical as far as I know. And, as far as I know, the same is the case on SO.
Now onto your bright and shining example of what every Gaming community should look like: ElitistJerks. First and foremost, the name really does say it all here; banning users for spelling mistakes would be extremely counterproductive. This site has an edit function, after all. If you see a typo, you have the power to fix it. But, that's not the main reason that us becoming that won't work. StackExchange is a question and answer site. As such, huge guides don't really work that well. Not only would a comprehensive strategy guide for everything require only self-answers, it would border on too broad every single time. They do not work very well for our format here.
So, to recap, thank you for bringing this problem to our attention. Rest assured, the userbase does care about quality content, and looks to improve it continuously, however, holding our site to the standards of completely different internet communities isn't really constructive. Every internet community is different. Even within StackExchange, there are differences in standards based on the needs of the community.