Talk:2016 Bihar school examination scandal

A member of the Guild of Copy Editors reviewed a version of this article for copy editing. However, a major copy edit was inappropriate at that time because of the issues specified below, or the other tags now found on this article. Once these issues have been addressed, and any related tags have been cleared, please tag the article once again for {{copyedit}}. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English. Visit our project page if you are interested in joining!

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2016 Bihar school examination scandal article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

India: Bihar Low‑importance

	India portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Bihar (assessed as Low-importance).

Requested move 19 January 2017

2016 Bihar school examination scandal

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: MOVED to alternate proposal: 2016 Bihar school examination scandal, which at least had a couple of supporters and no opposers, it appears. (non-admin closure) Dicklyon (talk) 03:32, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bihar topper scam 2016 → Topper scam – per WP:CONCISE, disambiguation is not required. Topper scam currently redirects here Pratyush (talk) 20:11, 19 January 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. -- Dane ^talk 22:22, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:58, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@PratyushSinha101: Across the world there has been much dishonesty with examination results. We need the disambiguator. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:58, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- @Anthony Appleyard: Since we don't have any other article of examination dishonesty with the name "Topper scam", nor could I find any notable examination dishonesty incident that was referred to as "Topper scam". I don't see a reason for disambiguation. I would readily vote for disambiguation in case someone comes up with another notable article with the name "Topper scam". Pratyush (talk) 05:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And the name "Topper scam" was unclear to me until I read the article. "Topper" for an examination winner may be Indian usage, but I in England had never heard of that usage. I only knew "topper" as slang for "top hat". Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:45, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- ~~In that case, a hatnote should do the job. Pratyush (talk) 09:41, 20 January 2017 (UTC)~~[reply]
  - This would be a completely inappropriate use of a hatnote as I read the guideline. Andrewa (talk) 05:20, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks for pointing out. Pratyush (talk) 08:43, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I find both names quite unrecognisable, and suspect that most English speakers would be the same. Is this a systematic problem with our emphasis on common names? Or doesn't it really matter? Tempted to relist, I'm not sure what to suggest. Andrewa (talk) 16:03, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"Common name" within what group? This scam is likeliest to be discussed and written about mostly in and around Bihar, or at least in India, but its name's meaning needs to be clear for readers elsewhere. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:23, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Very well put. Andrewa (talk) 05:30, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: How about Topper (education scam)? This name would certainly give a bit of idea about the article to the readers. Pratyush (talk) 06:20, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- ~~Tentative support~~ for Topper (education scam) or similar. Best yet. Andrewa (talk) 20:18, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - But IIO's suggestion below is better still. Andrewa (talk) 08:18, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Move to a recognizable and natural standard Indian English title such as Bihar school examination scandal 2016. "Topper" is journalistic slang in India, not a recognizable term. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:04, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also the rationale is wrong, we should never have simply WP:CONCISE, conciseness is only 1 of 5 WP:CRITERIA for titles. Too many WP:RMs seem to start with the idea that truncating titles to unrecognizable shorthand helps readers. It doesn't, that's why redirects exist. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:07, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support a descriptive phrase such as Bihar school examination scandal. ~~Not sure whether we need to add the date;~~ The article does suggest that this is nothing new, but I guess the scandal is new. (And it makes fascinating reading.) Andrewa (talk) 08:18, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrewa: unfortunately there was an even worse one in 2015: http://www.ibtimes.com/india-exam-scandal-hundreds-bihar-students-expelled-amid-unusual-cheating-practices-1853664 I'm not sure why we don't have an article, as that was more notable. In ictu oculi (talk) 20:34, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wow... worse than the top chemistry student not knowing the relationship between H₂O and water, and the top political science student thinking that the subject was about cooking? But point taken, despite not having the other article yet (I've always thought that was a rather strange rule) I support natural disambiguation using the year. Andrewa (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would support Bihar school examination scam 2016, scam is certainly the most used term to describe it. A google search gives 47,000 results for "Topper scam" while only about 1700 for "Topper scandal". Pratyush (talk) 08:43, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- But the scam has apparently been going on for years. This is about the scandal that broke in 2016. They are different topics. Andrewa (talk) 22:17, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alternate proposal 2016 Bihar school examination scandal 2016

I think it's time to put an explicit alternate proposal. Andrewa (talk) 22:27, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support move to ~~Bihar school examination scandal 2016~~ as proposed above. Andrewa (talk) 22:27, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Change that to 2016 Bihar school examination scandal, see below. Andrewa (talk) 03:04, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support 2016 Bihar school examination scandal. Most articles seem to place the year of the event at the beginning of the title. feminist 14:13, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Happy either way. Veterans Health Administration scandal of 2014 gives the date last. 2016 South Korean political scandal puts it first. Is there a pattern or reason to prefer one or the other? How did you decide that Most articles seem to place the year of the event at the beginning of the title? I'm trying to find a search methodology to test this claim, and failing so far. Andrewa (talk) 07:46, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Having looked at Category:Political scandals in the Philippines (that's just the one a desperation Google eventually led to) and Category:Summer Olympics by year, User:Feminist appears to be correct. Category:Political scandals in India does not really confirm, not enough articles to say either way, so it might be worth looking at other subcategories of Category:Political scandals by country.

But I think that's enough to make a call, and as only I and she have explicitly !voted on this alternate proposal I'm changing it to her suggestion.

As I think this is consistent with several other !votes above, hopefully that is now consensus enough to move - but that's not my call of course. Andrewa (talk) 03:04, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

^{[needs copy edit]}