Personally, Raven Dreamer has a point about the accepted answer being a bit of a drag on the older question.
There should only be one question, and Raven Dreamer's is the more comprehensive version. The older one should be closed as an exact duplicate of it: there is precedent that even though the close reason mentions time playing a factor into the closure, the more canonical of the two duplicates is the one that should stay open.
I don't see merging as a good solution, as the only answer on the older question doesn't address all the stats, so it wouldn't answer the new, comprehensive question. That is, merging only works well when both the answers and questions cover the exactly the same ground. In this case, they don't: one's a subset of the other.
However, I believe the intention is also to have some amount of duplication so people can find what they're looking for without having to click through to the duplicate once they're on the site. In that case, I'd say keep them both open, albeit with a better title on the earlier one ("What do these stats mean?" tells me nothing).
I personally think this option is bogus, as it opens the door to me asking about a different subset of stats, or asking about the same stats but in a different context, and if we're just going to ask about item attributes the dungeon-siege-3 tag is going to be really lame.
To wit, there's another question about price tags: is the value of an item also an item attribute? If so, should it be closed and merged as a duplicate, too?
Which brings me to the real problem with these item attribute questions: they're really soft, and they're likely to be completely explained when the game comes out tomorrow: either in the manual, or in the game's help files. They were only interesting in so far as the demo didn't explain the details of the game (because it's a demo). I can understand if something's tricky or not explained very well at all, but if it is the case that the standard attributes are explained clearly in game, why are we asking these questions in the first place?
Long story short, if we had one comprehensive version of the question, that'd be good. So I'd support taking Raven Dreamer's question, generalizing it even more, and closing the other question as a duplicate of it. I'd say we should just make the question community wiki too; this way we have one, collaboratively edited, canonical list of all the attributes.