2008/4/29 Christiano Moreschi <moreschiwikiman(a)hotmail.co.uk>uk>:
Not really. If an article's always going to be a stub, there's no point having
it all.
I disagree that a BLP is ever "always" going to be a stub - in this
specific case, many union leaders go into politics; at the least, he
may turn into another [[Bob Crow]].
Our inability to predict the future extends to other categories of
article, too. For instance, before 1st August 2007, many might have
said that [[I-35W Mississippi River bridge]] was "always going to be a
stub". Having it existing as a stub probably helped editors build it
up when it became somewhat more notable than it previously had been.