This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-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.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Latest comment: 30 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I suspect that the word "scam" has a different meaning in Indian English than in the rest of the English-speaking world. In any case, it reads like "defraud", "fraud", or "deception", while many of the events described in the article would be better characterized as "theft", "wrongdoing", "mismanagement", "mishandling", "misconduct", "impropriety", "cover-up", or "corrupt acts", depending on how one wanted to shade the meaning. I hope that editors who are trying to make the article more clear for the average reader take a minute to consider using some of the terms I have suggested here. Abductive (reasoning)08:58, 26 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
The government initially was in absolute denial about any leaks whatsoever. They proudly claimed, boasted how immaculately they conducted such a large exam involving 2.3 million candidates. This obviously was a "deception", hence the students. parents and teachers on social media called it scam and fraud.
Later, as concrete evidence of leaks were discovered, the government finally accepted that leaks had occurred. Since the leaks were not at an "extreme", (only tens of thousands were affected out of so many) level, and since there was no proof that the government establishment was directly involved on a mass scale, it was decided (by the supreme court) that its perfectly fine to proceed with admission protocols.
