JAY JG wrote:
Merge votes are typically "merge whatever is useful". It's not an endorsement of the current contents, certainly not all of them, and it's definitely a statement that wherever the contents should be, it's not *here*. Some editors pretend that 10 deletes, 4 merges, and 3 keeps means the article should stick around, when, in fact, it's a strong statement that *this* article should not exist, though it's possible that the information in it belongs somewhere else.
So then merge it. A "keep" result doesn't mean "don't ever touch this article again!", it just means "don't delete." Normal editing can proceed from there.
On the other hand, "merge whatever is useful" is a subjective interpretation unless the voters explicitly describe what they think is useful - perhaps they think it's _all_ useful, perhaps they just like the navbox at the bottom. So someone merging solely on the basis of merge votes (for example, a closing admin who is just obeying "consensus") should IMO do it as conservatively as possible to make sure nothing useful gets left behind. Other editors who come along later can edit based on more detailed criteria and value judgements.