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.