`   ==Re-``influenced-by``== As far as I'm concerned, if the page for a programming language Y lists that it was ``influenced by`` other language X, then language X should have a reciprocating ``influenced`` link in its infobox to language Y. However, the set of other languages that influenced a language should be kept to a minimum. That is, even though several languages are descended from Java, and Java was descended from C, this doesn't mean that C should be necessarily be listed as having influenced the language. Such ``influenced``-by-proxy links are incorrect, as there is a more direct ancestor. However, that does not apply to this (at least in the case of Factor). Also, if a language is mentioned in the infobox, it shouldn't have a second redundant link under ``See Also``, which some people like to add. In the case of Factor, its own website states that Forth was a inspiration to it. As for Cat, its website at  describes the language as ``Think Forth meets Haskell``. I do agree that Forth is more of a stretch for Cat, as Joy also inspired it. If you believe this to be in error, then modify Cat and Forth's infoboxes/pages accordingly. As for TinyKiss, if it's notable enough to have a Wikipedia page, and Pascal and Modula are the most specific languages it inherits from, I'd add the links. Honestly, such infobox links are tiny and unobtrusive and help succinctly describe language lineage. I see little harm in adding them. Sorry for the length of this comment ;-) Also, all this is just IMHO, I don't think there's a policy doc about this issue. Perhaps there should be.  `