One major problem with what you've said above:
Wikipedia has only one article on a topic, no matter
how many synonyms there are for the major word we use
to entitle the article.
Synonyms for stupid: brainless, dense, doltish, dopey,
dorky, dull, dumb, fatuous, half-witted, mindless,
oafish, obtuse, senseless, simple, slow, thick,
thickheaded, unintelligent, vacuous, weak-minded,
witless. Related terms: feebleminded, retarded,
simpleminded; foolish, idiotic, imbecilic, moronic.
These terms can't all have their own articles to
contain their etymologies, they would mostly redirect
to "Stupidity" on wikipedia if anyone bothered to make
redirects for them all. If we determine that the
etymologies are notable, where do they go? Clearly
none of them would belong in the "Stupidity" article.
If the word it notable, then it can have its own article. "Moron" and
"idiot" both have their own articles, for example, despite their
current meaning being exactly the same as "stupid".