Thanks for the response. I will try and justify myself:
To put it in perspective, suppose there are books with 50000 pages full of infoboxes and other content put together in a small space, how likely are people to be able to consume that knowledge or understand it?
Avoid visual clutter: redundant links, irrelevant images, and meaningless typography flourishes slow users down.
We're not thinking in terms of a simple book here, we're thinking in terms of game guides. This is in Japanese but should give perspective. Guide books are very different, and we actually have included more data found within the game than a lot of these guide books.
As I said, even if not every reader understands it, that's no reason not to include the data at all. Not everyone reading a boss page needs to know how much its Magic Defense stat is, but many others will want to know. Not everyone needs to know that it is immune to Blind, but many others will know that it is and won't cast that spell against the boss. In fact, even in cases where we list a boss' immunity to a spell that the party can't have yet, that's still important for anyone using ROM hacks - and believe me, there are a lot of ROM hacks of the games. There is a lot of data here, and it's all useful.
How content is added, placed and organized has a lot of impact on how likely it is that people will read it. Editors may want to add cool little features, but there is a good chance that nobody (except them) is reading those huge infoboxes with so many collapsed sections and optional data in tabbers.
That's because not every reader needs the collapsed sections and optional data in tabbers, that's the whole point. By making the data optional, it allows users to select which is more helpful to them, as opposed to splitting hairs by forcing them to scroll through the ones they don't need to know.
Ultimately, it is up to the community. If they feel the need to have many "features" and so much content in a small space, they can keep the old infoboxes, and design it anyway they want.
This doesn't solve the problem at all. I know what you mean, you don't want editors to just keep demanding features that reach the point where they don't help people. But my problem here is that this way of dealing with it doesn't help; it doesn't attempt to understand why the features are wanted, why users would want the content in such a small space, and until those things are understood, it's impossible for users to provide any helpful alternatives to the problem here.