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.