From what I am reading, it sounds like you would like to import a word document into a module (though the same should apply if you are importing into a folder alone) and have all members of each list imported into a single requirement.  In other words, you do *not* want each member of the list to end up in a separate requirement. 

One thing that is good to know is which version of the product you are using as there have been changes that impact the behavior here.  Before RM 4.0.3, the code was overly generous in splitting up the list members into their own requirements.  After RM 4.0.3, there have been changes to make it less generous.  However, there are definitely still cases in which it will split up the members of the list. 

The members of the lists (reference Planning a Word Import – not directly stated, but I’m referring to the part where it says “If a numbered list contains fractional or segmented parts, the list is converted to a paragraph”) will be split when:

·         There is a fractional or segmented part in the list.  For example, you have a list with an item such as “1.1” or “2.5”.  Those elements will cause a split, but adjacent members without the number after the period should start rendering in a single artifact again.

·         If any member of the list is a heading, then all members of the list will be rendered in their own requirements.

·         If a member of the list contains a table, then the list will be split there.

·         RequisitePro Bookmarks can also cause list members to be split where they occur.

So a workaround would be to look for those cases and attempt to fix up the document so that it does not contain any of those characteristics.

We have changed this behavior because some customers would like each list item to be a separate requirement, whereas others would like them to stay together.  We have an enhancement item to track future changes to this for now: Import/parse Requirements from Word/Rich Text should provide an option to import each list/bullet item as an artifact (52568)

I do not know if there are any plans to merge artifacts.  Someone else would need to comment there.  

Thanks - let us know if there are more questions!