@siljelb, can’t you argue the same about to different blood pressure measurements? Excuse the poor example, but lets say one where the patient it at rest and lying down, and the other after significant physical effort, standing up and with a different measurement location? Ie, blood pressure measurements are not always comparable, but still the same generic concept of blood pressure. Modelling them as different archetypes makes things more difficult for interoperability, implementation etc.
I also get your point, with my argument you could also say there should be a “score” archetype that caters for all scores (NEWS, PEWS etc), the scoring formula is kept elsewhere and is only referenced through the score archetype metadata (protocol etc). That is not what I am arguing for 
I have little experience in modelling archetypes, so I value your and the rest of the communities input (and may very well soon realize I’m way off here :D)! But in other areas of modelling and separating responsibilities in a large and complex EHR, this doesnt feel scalable to me. Im just worried that we are not using the right tools in the wider informatics toolbox, and instead treating everything as a nail as we have our well known arhcetype model hammer.