SCP Foundation

I have to congratulate your effort, and you've got a concept with really good potential here, but this is riddled with errors & has no real structural flow to it whatsoever. It's frankly just poorly written, and reads like an un-proofread first draft. -1.

There's a few nitpicks I have that would get you a great starting point to improve from, though:

• Fix the grammatical errors, please ("a airtight room", "it is a very rare occasion", etc). Even if English isn't your first language, or there's something else which prevents you from getting it 100% perfect every time, even running it through an editor would have helped with these.
• More detail in the description section - the sentences read extremely stunted and low-effort as of now.
• Sub-instances which it creates would not be denoted XXXX-2 - they'd be either -1 or -A (i'd recommend -A). You don't skip numbers.
• The interview is… not at all realistic. It honestly reads like a cut-and-paste of 682's, and doesn't work well being as short as it is for a humanoid. You can't just write "[small passage describing the interview]", you have to actually write the passage.

And some conceptual nitpicks:

• If I'm reading this right, the concept is "serial killer who turns everyone he kills into a clone of himself". This immediately raises the classic cloning problem - how do you tell which one's the real, or original? Would the Foundation use a special marker to keep track, or just make sure all except one are dead and hold onto the one they have? Would its anomaly (which you're saying it somehow doesn't even know about) learn to replicate markers used to identify the original?
• Cross-containment of SCPs is almost always denied. 999 is not an officially approved (in-universe) Thaumiel. If an anomaly's procedures involve another anomaly, that's gotta have some serious backstory behind it.
• "Testing is [not available] (I'd recommend using "not permitted", "prohibited", or similar) on the original, but it is for clones"? Again, how do they tell which one's the original? Are the originals severely incapacitated mentally and exist only to be violent? Can they not create more clones, furthering the clone-chain?

This is a severely underdeveloped concept in a poorly-written document, but could do well once you're more proficient in your writing skill. I genuinely don't mean to be harsh, I just have trouble conveying my own tone a lot of the time - keep at it, keep reading SCPs, and get some friends to proofread & edit for you before trying your hand at an official release again. I'm sure you've got it in you, though! :')

So, the concept of this skip definitely needs some more thinking. Currently the idea is this "book that hurts people if they hear the noise it makes". Barely any kind of central Narrative to speak of. Not to mention the noticeable lack of content and substance to really dig my teeth into. Another pretty big issue that I see with new authors is tonal aspects (this not a you problem), this article could definitely be revised into something more clinical and less personal.

« SCP-XXXW | SCP-XXXX | SCP-XXXY »

this also needs to be changed.

Ok so that is all the 'not-so-great' aspects of the article out of the way. I am going to give you a few helpful pointers on how to improve this article:

• Give some more thought onto what this SCP is. Have a read on some other articles on Series VI and maybe ask around a bit and get some critique via Ideas Critique forum
• Make a Sandbox page to really revise this draft or even make a new one entirely!
• Get your draft reviewed via IRC or the crit team (and Drafts Critique forum ;)).

That is currently the best advice I can give you for now.

All the best for now and have a great day!

I see what you're going for here- turning a real world mysterious event into an SCP- but unfortunately this doesn't really work. As it stands right now this SCP is just a fairly literal account of the event just written as an SCP document. There's no real exploration of the mystery and no greater narrative- nothing to take this beyond just a literal recounting of the event. As a result I get the same thing from this as I would simply googling the event and reading a news report, which isn't very exciting.

Your inspiration here is a good starting point for sure. The potential for a greater, interesting narrative is there. You just need to explore it! Think about where the blobs might have originated from, why they're making people sick, things like that.

This is just a murder monster. That's basically all there is to this article- a thing that warps around and kills people. That's not very exciting. When you had the image that specified that it was a child's drawing I thought maybe there'd be a twist here, but there's nothing. The image contributes nothing to the article, and the article has nothing this wiki hasn't seen a thousand times over and then some.

If you want to come back to this idea, you really need to think about what story you want to tell us. Why should we as your audience care about this object? What is the story?

this ones kind of boring, theres no scare or hook its just a doll with zero shown "personality" that can take over your mind in the very specific case you touch it. Some more detail could make this more interesting

So…first thing is that the contest posting period is over, just a heads up!

That said, this isn't all that exciting of an anomaly. Your offset page is totally blank and sometimes just breaks, so all we have right now is just the bit saying life on Earth is anomalous and then going "oops no it isn't!" Whatever twist you have in mind, I hope it's super good because right now the anomaly isn't very original.

Hi there, your article's not doing so good so here's some feedback to help you improve. ^_^

I'll condense the problems with the Special Containment Procedures into two lines. The majority of the information within it should be told in the description instead of there, containment procs should describe what it takes to contain the item. I'm guessing you're not too familiar with the Metric system as a 2cmx2cmx2cm box is very small and wouldn't hold a jacket unless it was doll sized.

The rest of the document feels very personal and relaxed, which isn't a good thing. Almost all SCP articles are written in a cold clinical manner. If you're unsure how to do that then check out this guide. Setting the test log in a separate tab is unorthodox, but its possible to pull it off if done right.

My last bit of advice is this: you don't need to include an extremely popular SCP in your article. Your idea has the potential to stand on its own feet and do great! You just need to give it the chance. Take it to the Ideas Critique forum and get some more feedback from the veterans, they'll help you turn this into something wonderful! Never give up!

Hey there, thought I'd leave you some feedback on your article to help you improve and grow as a writer. ^_^

SCP-5324 is located in the rear bedroom of House 43 on Broke Lane in Brent London. The House is currently occupied by researcher Dr. Warren White…

This is the first line in the Special Containment Procedures. This is the kind of information normally told in the description, the containment procs should explain how to contain the anomaly. There's also some grammar issues that I've noticed, instances of an SCP are usually written as SCP-5324-B and its hard to tell when the description ends and the addenda begins. You can fix that by making the title of each new finding bold to help convey that this is new information.

This has some good potential, it just needs a bit more love and care. Keep trying and don't give up!

I don't think this is a bad idea per say, but a lot of this is very on the nose and doesn't go anywhere particularly interesting. The anomaly in question feels like very literal pop culture raptors with the addition of asexual reproduction for scary factor. If the narrative helped explore their origins more then you'd have something more successful here.

Overall I'm mostly left a bit confused by this article. I just don't think you quite answered enough questions.

Author, it is clear that you wish to contribute to the SCP wiki, which is a lovely thing to do! However, your SCP lacks proper clinical tone, has several SPaG errors and the narrative is weak. There is also a lot of unnecessary redaction present. Lucky for you, this wiki has a really helpful guide to writing an SCP!

Here's the guide: http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/how-to-write-an-scp

Give it a read, it covers all the pitfalls your SCP exhibits and details exactly how to properly write an SCP.

Hope to see some great work from you in the future!

I see 13 wall-of-text journal entries, the presentation simply makes me not want to read through them.

Presentation, for myself anyway, plays a large part in what makes an article come together. I could also rehash what Dr Golden said, in that your clinical tone needs some work. I suggest reading more SCP's on the site, especially newer ones, and go through the highly recommended greenlight process.

This entire thing is WAY too reliant on crosslinks. This wouldn't necessarily be such an issue if the main anomaly itself had any sort of real narrative focus, but it becomes background noise in an article dedicated entirely to crosslinking other anomalies for a narrative that never plays out. While I take issue with this, there's something here way more egregious.

SCP-973 has taken a significant interest in only chasing after colored people, which has caused ongoing significant controversy on the global level. A movement known as "Black Lives Matter" (BLM) has begun worldwide, where riots will take place demanding back the rights of their colored people.

This is horrifically racist on its own, and even more racist when you're familiar with SCP-973 and what it does to people. Referring to black people as "colored people" is tasteless at best and racist at worse, and your overall phrasing here does nothing to help your case. If you want to revisit this idea, take this part out, don't replace it, and leave it in the dumpster. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't intend to be racist here, but I'll let you know that you shouldn't try to write something like that again.

This thing is extremely dense and poorly formatted. Whatever idea is present here is completely lost in a sea of text that is extremely difficult to read through. Make sure you're following the guides and templates as you write!

That level restriction and collapsible isn't doing this SCP any favors. None of the actual article's content justifies that level of security which makes it seem more like a flashy coding addon designed to attract attention.

Why isn't anyone allowed to do research on this? That was your ability to craft an actual narrative here, but you kneecapped yourself by forbidding anyone from doing anything interesting with the SCP in question. That leaves me as a reader frustrated because I know there's more here that you just aren't telling me about the object in question.

This just feels incomplete. There are formatting issues like the level restriction still saying "XXXX" instead of what I assume is supposed to be the SCP number, and from a plot perspective, there are entirely unanswered questions such as why the river has these properties and what the monsters are like (ambiguity can be a plus in an article, but this goes far beyond that into being a frustrating absence of necessary information). The issues even extends to basic factual details like where the river is, or contradictory claims such as the river being a certain length but also changing its length, or that research cannot be conducted except the research that is allowed.