Deletion of Development of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion

Comment: or '''merge''' into the general development article. I'd prefer a merge because the content is all real-world and not a mix; however, an entire real-world article is a nice precedent, as it shows that fiction writers are also interested in the out-of-universe aspects (and it clearly passes  and doesn't seem too indiscriminite, if a little overly detailed). This entire AfD is a serious problem; why are we discouraging subarticles on ''real-world'' aspects, when we are all obsessed with keeping subarticles on ''in-universe'' aspects? Think about it: you are sending the wrong message. Deletion is a simpleton and childish poor approach to problems like this; fix it appropriately by starting a merge proposal, and have respect for the people who are trying to set a precedent here. &mdash
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: Yikes. This is ''incredibly'' anal-retentive detail, definitely |indiscriminate, and dare I say it -- crufty
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:IINFO)

Comment: Yet another detailed, well-written, referenced article that I imagine has been branched out of the parent article at some point.  &mdash
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:PAPER)

Comment: There are no guidelines of any kind on "level of detail", other than that the detailed information must be either be explaining a more notable whole, or that the details must have been covered by reliable sources specifically about them. The latter is the case here: many reliable sources have written articles ''specifically'' about the development of Oblivion, making the development of the game suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, with as much information as the sources and article length allow. The article fits .I agree with the above editors that the level of detail is approaching ridiculous levels. However, that is not because of this Wikipedia article, but because the amount of pre-game hype around games in major franchises exceeds all normal proportions. Not including this in Wikipedia would be terribly : it is not up to us, Wikipedia editors, to exclude this if reliable sources have written about it. Changing the games press does not start here. Finally, "Detailed Histories" (what this article is) is not on #INFO
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Article size (WP:SIZE||WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:NOT)

Comment: I'm not sure it fails  by a strict reading, but I must concur with the nominator - this is a level of detail to a specific topic that is not appropriate for a general knowledge encyclopedia.  A merge might be proper, but I suspect not needed as the main article has a healthy "development" section already
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)