"Wiki is not paper" is often cited -- but it's a stronger argument for merging information than leaving small articles separate: since Wiki is not paper, redirects are easy, and we do not have to worry about someone having to pull out separate volumes and flip pages if directed elsewhere. We don't have to make sure there's a scrap of information at every conceivable search term; that's what redirects and the search function are for. Articles that are "cruft" on their own (and I do try to use the term only jokingly!) can be a helpful bit of detail in a larger picture.
"Wiki is not paper" is such an unfortunate phrase. Not because of what it stands for -- the fact that we're actually *not* limited by physical informational constraints, which is a wonderful thing -- but because it is used in a way to imply that people who think things are not notable are basing the standard of notability on a notion of physical limitations. It becomes hollow and meaningless; it becomes synonymous with the error of thinking that just because you *can* have an article about every elementary school in the country means that you *should*.
Wikipedia is not paper... but it still is an encyclopedia!
FF