Steve Bennett wrote:
IMHO, stubs are vulnerable because they have so few
links to them or
from them, and are so likely to get "lost". More links increases the
chances that some kind person will stumble upon it and fix it. I never
actively seek out stubs to work on - but if I hit one, I occasionally
flesh it out a bit.
Every type of stub I've seen so far has some sort of corresponding
non-stub category that the article can be placed in, so whenever I
remove extra stub templates I make sure the article's properly
categorized. They don't get "lost" that way.