Talk:Mike Bost

message: I see someone removed the line "in typical Republican crybaby fashion." This is why Wikipedia is utterly useless on the topic of politics and "hot-button" issues.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.204.211.10 (talk) 19:38, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The always objective editors of Wikipedia 

message: Are you mad they didn't leave it in.......?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.193.166.213 (talk) 23:17, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: RE: The always objective editors of Wikipedia 

message: I'm skeptical about the appropriateness of including these two paragraphs in the article:
In 1986, after a neighbour's dog bit Bost's 4-year-old daughter resulting in 19 stitches on her face, Bost drove to the owner's home and shot the dog to death while it was penned in an enclosure. Bost was charged with criminal damage to property and reckless misconduct, but found not guilty.
In 2006, a revolver belonging to Bost was stolen from his gun safe. According to police records, he didn't know about the theft until police informed him that the gun had been used to threaten another man's life. Bost took police to the safe, and found the gun was missing. How the gun was stolen is unknown.
In neither case was Bost found guilty of any crime. The Chicago Sun-Times post is just a re-hashing of the HuffPo article. These seem an awful lot like Democratic campaign talking points that are rehashing the past to try to paint the candidate in a particular light. Does anyone have arguments for why this info should be included in its current form? Is it encyclopedic enough, given appropriate weight, and reliably sourced enough for its inclusion in current form? Champaign Supernova (talk) 22:48, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't heard anything back from anyone, so I'm going to remove this material. Champaign Supernova (talk) 05:06, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

text: I don't think Mitt Romney's article is a relevant precedent here, per WP:OTHERSTUFF. As for a Google News search, that's not a great test of notability per WP:NOTNEWS. This incident is probably coming up in Google News because it's been the recent focus of ads by Bost's opponent. I don't think it's enduring or particularly encyclopedic. Champaign Supernova (talk) 19:18, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

text: You say "There are no shortage of examples of pages discussing past criminal activity", and you're right. But I don't see any evidence that Bost was charged with any crime in this "dog incident." You've also added a very unreliable source. See WP:RS for more information. The way you've written the text is also not neutral and makes it seem as if you're blaming a four year old for getting bitten by a dog, blaming the child's father for not preventing the dog bite, then blaming the child's father for addressing the dog bite by killing the dog. This is not encyclopedic writing. Marquardtika (talk) 03:22, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undue weight? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Mike Bost. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thetelegraph.com/news/news/50101521/Illinois-Chamber-endorses-Bost-for-representative?template=art_smartphone
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:07, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Did not work. --1990'sguy (talk) 13:51, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified