Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Difficulty level

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep - Non-Admin Closure. Tiddly-Tom 18:38, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Difficulty level

Your first reaction to this AFD may be "Hey! Difficulty level, that's a notable term; it should be kept." But I'd like to ask yourself to slow down and actually have a look at the article. Now, think about it: exactly how informative could this article possibly be?

Let's break it down.

First, we have the lead. Which gives us an obvious description to an obvious term. "In general usage, difficulty level refers to the relative difficulty of completing a task or objective." Duh. Does anyone really need to have that spelt out for them to understand?

The rest of the article crumbles into a slew of examples about how "such-and-such games has such-and-such difficulty options", "playing on this difficulty in this game changes this aspect" and so forth. Try this experiment: read the article while ignoring every example. Not much real content is there? What the article boils down to is this: glorified cruft. No matter how many examples get added, there will always be more to thrown in, since every game handles difficulty differently. Wikipedia is not a game guide, we shouldn't be spelling out every way difficulty can be changed in a game.

I rest my case. SeizureDog (talk) 11:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep, what you said is somewhat true but I suppose people who don't play computer games might not know this stuff. If the history section was made the focal point of the article rather then a tiny little section it could be quite alright.--Him and a dog 12:30, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per Josquius. The article as is needs serious help, and although the encyclopedic version might turn out to be not much more than a stub, I think it's important to have. JuJube (talk) 13:21, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The concept is much wider than computer gaming and the article currently says nothing about the way it works in piano teaching, skiing, climbing, puzzles, etc. Since there is much scope for improvement, deletion is not appropriate. Colonel Warden (talk) 15:04, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Expanding it to include other concepts would just make the article that much more rediculous. It would be tantamount to a Difficulty article that just listed how things are made more difficult.--SeizureDog (talk) 15:20, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think there's potential for a useful article on the _quantification_ of "difficulty" - as well as video games, mountaineering and diving come immediately to mind, and I'm sure there are other examples. Tevildo (talk) 02:07, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand per Colonel Warden. As a minimum, some reference to "degree of difficulty" (as in diving) seems appropriate. Tevildo (talk) 15:14, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but I would consider taking it the other way, renaming to something like Difficulty level (computer game), and focusing on the level design aspect of it -- RoninBK _{T C} 16:28, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep No valid deletion reason is given. Rray (talk) 04:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.