With all due respect, your primary arguments boil down to "there's no harm in it".
While that is certainly true that's not conducive to writing a good or engaging article.
Let me reiterate some of my points:
Why is it bad for an article to break from pre-established ideas of what an article should do? I don't understand the fixation on having everything fall into nice uniform lines. Why not encourage things which break norms? Why not get creative with ideas? Why force people to fall into these lame norms with their writing.
My problem isn't just that this article does flowery prose, it's that the prose doesn't serve a higher function When you "get creative and break from the norm" of something that has a preestablished format/tone you need to do it in a way that serves the narrative of what you are writing.
Taking another wiki as an example, some SCP articles break from the highly-scientific and analytical tone despite that site's stricter standards, but whenever it does it pretty much ALWAYS serves a purpose such as, for example, designed to lure in an SCP that like reading about itself (SCP 3393), talks about something that cant be described (SCP 055), or something that destroys anything describing it (SCP 2521). Otherwise, it sticks out in a way that does NOT reflect well on it when compared to other traditional articles or other articles that break from the norm in a better-executed fashion.
This is..not really true. A level article doesn't need to focus on world-building. A level article can be like a tale. World-building is only one aspect of a level but ignoring the other options you have would be kind of lame in this scenario. Using a level as a backdrop to tell a story or to create a well written atmosphere shouldn't devalue the page as a piece of writing. If every level page was just focused on adding more to the backrooms as a setting this site would get boring fast.
You ARE worldbuidling when you write a level. You are expanding the backrooms, adding onto a part of its world, setting, and sometimes even characters. That is par of the course when you are describing a part of a setting.
With all due respect, why would you write a level article and then barely talk about the level itself? If that's the case then what's stopping you from making a tale instead where it would fit better?
Nobody is saying you CAN'T write a Level as a background for some sort of higher narrative there are tons of levels on the site that do it really well. For example Level 148 The Living Level mainly serves as the background for the conflict between Knox and the Level itself but fully fleshes itself out as a setting.
Or Level 11 which is similarly vague and written in a different format but gives you enough clues and details to sparse out what it truly is: a Lotus Eater Machine that actively draws in wanderers and messes with any attempts to truly describe itself.
Again in comparison this level isn't all that well fleshed out and we have no idea what the place itself is like or how wanderers interact with it.
And why is this information nessecary for a narrative-centric article? It seems like unnecessary details which would just make the article feel bloated.
See my previous point but also: the framing device of not just the Level articles but the site itself is that it's a database made up of a collection of information on levels, entities, events, etc..
The very point of Level articles is that they tell you what it's like, what's happening there, and how people interact with the level. Again, it's definitely possible to make it narrative-focused without neglecting that (see my previous examples).
Sure, but there's nothing inherently wrong with using a gimmick in an article. I think honestly it's done quite well here because it doesn't stick out as this major idea or moment. It's thrown in which I actually kind of like because unlike when it's usually done it actually catches the reader by surprise here.
Yes, as I said a gimmick CAN work if executed properly. But here? It's sort of just slapped into the article with no real build up or effort to integrate it into the narrative of the article itself. It doesn't work here for the same reason why jumpscares in horror are rarely considered above cheap unless done well:
It's easily slapped together, insertable into anything, and easy to pull off without much thought. After that initial read/jumpscare? There is no real impact to it.
You need to actively build up to something like that and even then it won't work in most circumstances unless specifically tailored to it. (See: SCP-001 Scrantron where it builds up on itself and waits until the very end to reveal the reader/site themselves is SCP-001 or again Level 11)
I will stand by the fact the length of an article does not matter as much as it's quality of writing. Hell, in recent months I've found myself enjoying short articles because I don't have to spend a big ass time investment reading them. Sometimes it's nice to read a quick, short thing which leaves you feeling something or throws in nice prose without needing to drag it's feet on including major story beats. Sure, short articles can be underdeveloped but this article isn't some clinical thing trying to portray information. This is trying to give a feeling, and it does that.
And I will stand by another point: this article is far too brief. Too brief to really leave an impact too regardless of what it's going for, and if what it's going for is what you say it is then it shouldn't be a level as opposed to a tale.
Again in creating a level you're trying to expand the world of the backrooms. If you aren't interested in doing that at all, then what's the point in making a level as opposed to a tale or other kind of article? That's like if you made an SCP article that barely includes the SCP in question outside of like one or two vague descriptors.