`  :1. The Cato/Koch stuff is a hot topic. (If you've watched MSNBC, you'll see that the Koch family is frequently brought up as a topic.) As I recall, there was considerable WP debate about how much info on the Kochs & Cato should be inserted (in both articles). And I recall that the note, as opposed to inline descriptions or mere footnoting, was a compromise WRT the display of info. (More article history and/or talk page review would be needed to confirm this.) Moreover, the Kochs are not a household name (like the BF Goodrich Blimp is), so a mere wikilink is not enough to satisfy those who want the Koch role in Cato expanded upon. 2. Irregardless [sic], there is no SYN in the Cato article. There is the ongoing corporate support listed in Cato, and ongoing corporate support for FEE can be added. It is mere background info. (NPR receives corporate support too.)  3. Now if the Cato article had quoted from The Science of Success (or other things that the Kochs had written), thereby giving us info about the ``moral beliefs`` etc. of the Kochs and thereby explaining their motivations for funding/supporting/creating Cato, that would be improper SYN!  –   `