Talk:Mike Hosking

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles New Zealand Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Moved here from Schwede66's talk page

Hi Schwede, I noticed you undid my removal of 'right wing' in the opening reference to Mike Hosking. I have had to undo it. Please do not encourage bias/flare in the opening sentence of a biographical wiki. (Take a look at Barack Obama or Bill O'Reilly - you do not reference their views in the introduction - only in body). For further reading on this - see Undue Weight. User:Mctuker —Preceding undated comment added 05:25, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mctuker: You posted your discussion on the wrong page and I hope you don't mind me shifting it here, where it belongs. I still don't agree with you because in this case, it has nothing to do with undue weight. Hosking is proud of being right wing, openly boasts about it, and is commonly known for it. From his own perspective, there is nothing controversial about it. His attitude is stated and referenced in the body. It is a defining characteristic of his character and it is thus appropriate to list it in the lead as per the manual of style, where it says: "The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents." Schwede66 09:43, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed a text added to the lede about this journalist's political leanings for two reasons: WP:UNDUE (since it focussed on only one aspect, ie criticism of a Labour government) and WP:BLPSPS (despite appearances, subjects themselves, ie primary sources, are a poor means to arrive at verifiability or consensus). I think it would be probably most appropriate to describe this journalist as conservative, but only with clear secondary, verifiable sources.--Goldsztajn (talk) 09:58, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've just reverted that as you've removed referenced content. Happy to see that shifted to the body of the article. Also, you removed other content that would seem relevant for a lead. Schwede66 21:49, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi folks, I think the lede for this page needs more information to summarise some of the key elements of what is in the rest of the page. I am going to have a play around with it. I won't use citations in this lede. but will use wikilinks if appropriate. I am thinking only three or so more sentences....famous last words! But, let's see. I will work in my sandbox initially. Realitylink (talk) 22:30, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have modified the lede, adding in a general summarised reference to the complaints. I don't think these items in the lede need citations as the information is fully cited below. I feel this lede now gives a more overall introduction. Realitylink (talk) 00:36, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi folks, it seems that now, with the discussion and action about the comments that Hosling made about Covid-19 death rates, is a good time to get an update into this page in the Controversy section. It could be started with stating the decision of the Broadcasting Standards Authority in the complaint against what Hoskin had said on an earlier broadcast. It is not simply adding his opinion - that would not be appropriate - but because it did escalate to a government body, it is probably notable enough to add. What is the thinking? Realitylink (talk) 08:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, well I have added a section regarding this. It has four citations. Feel free to comment and suggest changes. Realitylink (talk) 09:28, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Was his father's name Michael Noel James Hosking III, his grandfather Michael Noel James Hosking II and his great-grandfather Michael Noel James Hosking? Is there any reliable sourcing for the "IV" other than The Spinoff? Nurg (talk) 22:28, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]