SCP by Series
SCP Tales by Series
SCP Library
Discover Content
SCP Community
User Resources
Hello! I was looking to get some feedback/criticism on my first full SCP entry. I followed the rules of entry as close as a could, and I have a good feeling about this! If this idea seems upload worthy, please tell me! If anything needs to be fixed, PLEASE tell me!
I like it! I think the idea is a little meh because there isn't enough information on it to make it interesting and there isn't enough room for imagination to make up for that. However I do think the writing really does make up for it in this case. It's well structured and most of it actually adds to the story, which is something that bugs me when i'm reading SCPs. I would mention though, that some of the description is a little informal. Overall, good first draft.
Hope to see it (new and improved, of course) on the mainsite soon!
I appreciate the feedback! I'll try to merge some of it to be a bit more concise. I feel as though I've spread things out a bit too much, made it too long and drawn out. Might fully remove Addendum 1, rewrite as it's unit description in site 19.
I want to mention before I say anything else that I'm not really the chief advisor on this subject. I'm a long-time lurker and only recently made my first SCP draft, so take the things I say with a grain of salt.
Yeah, I'd say that's a good idea. From what I understand, addenda are supposed to add on to the original material or show chronological progression. It seems that Addendum 1 was basically part of the CP, but forced to seem like an addendum. You don't need 100 addenda in your text, keeping as much of it as possible in the source article is a good thing. So moving Addendum 1 to the CP is a good move imo.
First off, good job, the humanoid isn't cliqued, the concept is good for a first time and the writing is good. I don't view as its ready to publish yet though. One of the major problems is the description and the addendums, note that the addendums are supposed to be towards the end to finish it off, addendums 1-3 should be in the description, speaking of which, add more information to it, add it's powers and stuff like that. It should be obvious, not hidden away in interviews and addendums. Secondly, try and work on the tone, make it seem like a SCP article instead of a general description. try to check the guide hub for something on it, they have way more experience then me. Besides all that, good job.
OneGuy, this feedback is vague and misleading. Given that this is not the first time staff has needed to address problematic feedback from you, please refrain from posting any further reviews in the Writing Help forums until you have posted a successful mainsite article yourself.
First off, good job, the humanoid isn't cliqued, the concept is good for a first time and the writing is good.
I believe you mean "cliched", which I'm going to have to disagree with. The premise for the concept is a pretty standard creepy humanoid with a bunch of extra effects and behavioral details added on, which is one of the most commonly-done article formulas we have on the site.
Furthermore, the writing will definitely need work—there are some unprofessionally-written sections, and frequent mixups of it's and its (it's should be used to mean "it is" or "it has"; it's not a possessive word).
One of the major problems is the description and the addendums, note that the addendums are supposed to be towards the end to finish it off, addendums 1-3 should be in the description,
The description describes the object. The addenda in this draft are used correctly: they're not actually describing the object itself so much as providing additional information about the Foundation's interactions and experimental observations of it.
speaking of which, add more information to it, add it's powers and stuff like that.
From the the humanoid writing guide: if what's anomalous about your humanoid SCP object can be most accurately described as a voluntary "power" or "ability", you should probably start over.
Secondly, try and work on the tone, make it seem like a SCP article instead of a general description.
If the author isn't familiar with clinical tone, telling them "make it sound like an SCP article" isn't going to help them. They've written an SCP article already.
try to check the guide hub for something on it, they have way more experience then me.
If you're just going to tell someone a generic "read the guides" response (we have a lot of informational pages), it's better to let an experienced reviewer handle it rather than potentially misleading a new author.
See, this is the kind of feedback that really helps. Now, I do apologise for the mix-up of its and it's. I'm no newbie to writing, but doing that much writing on mobile device like I do is somewhat difficult.
Now, could you clarify on the "unprofessional-written sections"? I'd like to go back and rework them.
I attempted to not have it human at first. It's original idea WAS the grey mannequin, that could disguise itself as what it consumed through the mouth, but it got too complicated. Sad to hear that it's a cliche idea, but it's understandable.
Also, I'm glad to know I used the Addendum and Description right.
And since you seem to be much more versed in the SCP writing field, do you have any recommendations on how I can add a more "SCP" feel to the writing style?
Now, could you clarify on the "unprofessional-written sections"? I'd like to go back and rework them.
To be honest… there's a lot. An example is:
SCP-XXXX is a bipedal humanoid, approximately 1.83 meters in height when in it's basic state. This state appears grey and featureless, similar to a mannequin. This state can change depending on the situation it finds itself in, but will remain stuck in that altered state for a 96 hours period.
Clinical tone means sounding professional and being clear. Don't use too many words to describe something, and what you do write about should feel like the work of a real researcher's documentation and not a video game manual description. Here's how I would have worded this:
| SCP-XXXX is a bipedal humanoid, approximately 1.83 meters in height. When inactive, SCP-XXXX appears grey and featureless. SCP-XXXX is capable of altering its form in response to stimuli, but must maintain a new form for 96 hours following a physical transformation. |
do you have any recommendations on how I can add a more "SCP" feel to the writing style?
Granted, I'm much more a fan of shorter, more straightforward articles, so I personally would have preferred that there be less addendum content, mainly because most of the format seems kind of borrowed from existing articles and as such doesn't feel too novel to me? That said, you'd probably need to re-tweak the base idea to fix the main conceptual issues happening here.
Hmm. I may put a shorter draft in a second tab, see which one works better.
But re-tweaking the base idea might prove to be a bit of a challenge…
Also, what do you mean "borrowed from existing articles"?
But re-tweaking the base idea might prove to be a bit of a challenge…
Just use the Ideas and Brainstorming forum.
Also, what do you mean "borrowed from existing articles"?
The format of some of the addendum material reminds me of some other Series I stuff, such as the interview going through the pattern of interviewer talks to thing, thing doesn't like interviewer, at some point the thing freaks out, interview ends (the quip from the interviewer is optional).
Also, I'm not sure why the containment has so much extra text ("there is a lot that can be done…") and not much in the way of actual directions. It felt like a style that might have been more popular 8+ years ago.
What do you think of this new version of the draft? I took most of the comments on here into consideration.
Did you get the concept checked in the ideas and brainstorming forum I linked you to? This is still fundamentally a humanoid with powers.
Also, the bolded (don't use bold for emphasis, it looks unprofessional) expungment in the description is… kind of lame. Does it shift into a tiny purple unicorn on a unicycle? No? There's not enough established context in the article at that point to dissuade the reader from thinking that. That is sloppy expungment and will need to be addressed.
For the record, that expungement was kind of my fault. My bad.
Here's my feedback. Hopefully this will clear up some questions you have.
First thing's first, you want to know what's unprofessional. Here's some examples, and hopefully with these you can find the rest on your own!
1:"change depending on the situation it finds itself in. The catch, though, is that"
This makes it look like you're talking to the person reading the article, rather than writing a strictly professional research report. The key problem here is "the catch."
Try writing only with words that are absolutely necessary. This will give you a baseline, then you can add some more clarifications from there.
Here's your first paragraph, with any and all flair removed:
SCP-XXXX is a bipedal humanoid, approximately 1.83 meters in height. It is grey and featureless, similar to a mannequin. It can change forms on will, but must stay in the new form for 96 hours.
Now this looks too bland. Let's add some style.
SCP-XXXX is a bipedal humanoid,| Good start. I don't like how much time it takes to explain that it looks like a mannequin, however. Let's remove this first part and just say that it looks like a mannequin. That way you can leave room for more fun information.
approximately 1.83 meters in height.| 1.83 isn't approximate. That's very precise. You have a couple options. Get rid of the big word to save some space, or make it approximately 2. I like the approximate, so let's do that.
it is…similar to a mannequin| As I said before, let's move this to the start.
It can change forms on will, but must stay in the new form for 96 hours.|
Eww. I really butchered that. It should draw the reader in. Add more information, and then redact some to hook the reader into the article. "Wow this is cool! I wonder what that black part says."
"It can change forms to mimic a human, but it does not appear to be able to leave this state for 96 hours afterwards. If SCP-XXXX sees a human and feels threatened, it may take the form of [DATA EXPUNGED] to help it escape the threat."
This [DATA EXPUNGED] serves two purposes. One: it gets rid of a spooky wall of text. Two: It makes the reader interested. Who does it take the form of? They can then read farther into the article to piece together the answer.1
Here's our new paragraph.
SCP-XXXX appears to be a grey mannequin, approximately 2 meters in height. It can change forms to mimic a human, but it appears unable to leave this state for exactly 96 hours afterwards. When SCP-XXXX feels threatened, it may take the form of a nearby human or [DATA EXPUNGED] to help it escape the situation.
--[END STUPIDLY OVERSPECIFIC COMMENTS]--
Lightning round:
"Though, when alerted by human blood"
Human blood doesn't alert things. Maybe it's aroused by blood, or maybe just "when it smells human blood." Sometimes simpler is better.
"rows of large, albeit human-like teeth"
'Albeit' means "although." Typically used to indicate a contradiction or a drawback of some kind. Just remove the word in this case and it will flow better.
"In a previous section of SCP-XXXX's report…observers of this SCP."
Try removing this paragraph. Again, it looks like you're trying to justify your choices to the reader (I'm not trying to read your mind, just explaining how it comes across.) The SCP foundation doesn't need to explain that their researchers should be comfortable. Removing things of this sort will make your whole document look a little more professional and a little less dry.
"If viewing a human being…ne who knows the individual."
This is really cool information. This should be in the description, not the addendum. Remember, hook the reader. If your report gets cool halfway through, most people won't make it. It's really easy to just move the cool stuff to the beginning.
"it is best to supply it with raw meat, as that seems to be the best option."
Always look out for redundancies and repetition. The two Rs of evil. Choose one half, omit the other. "the best food option seems to be raw meat."
--[RIP LIGHTNING ROUND]--
Incredible, Zyn. You covered a large amount of feedback I had, at the same time as giving a feedback to another poster.
Doing my good turn daily here:
It has the ability to "shift" it's form to that of human, but will be stuck in said "shift" for exactly 96 hours.
"It's" is a contraction meaning "it is." "Its" is the possessive form of the third-person pronoun "it." Using "It's" interchangeably with "its" is, to be fair, a very common mistake. To avoid repeating it, ask yourself if you mean to say "It has the ability to 'shift' it is form to that of a human…"
Also, let it be known that SCP-XXXX's containment unit has two-way mirrors instead of windows."
I feel like this should go under the "Special Containment Procedures" heading, since it describes a unique feature of its cell.
If viewing a human being, and feeling threatened at the time, SCP-XXXX will take the form of the human it is viewing, or one in recent memory it believes will help it escape the threat.
I'm not quite able to articulate why I don't think this sounds particularly clinical. I would, however, suggest rewriting the first part to "Upon seeing a human it perceives to be a threat…" and the middle part to "…take the form of the human in question…" The end of that segment could probably stay as it is.
See INTERVIEW XXX-1
I don't believe there are any guidelines for the designations for interviews, documents and other addenda used in an SCP article. But I have noticed that their numbers are identical to the SCP's item number. So my bet is that there ought to be four X's here instead of three. On the other hand, you do have the right idea in using a series of X's as a placeholder for the actual interview number. It's just that, again, there simply needs to be one additional X, as it will presumably be replaced by your SCP's item number.
And finally,
DECRYPT/RE-ENCRYPT
I knew there was something funny here, but I had to look it up in order to articulate it to you. Encryption basically means that text is being converted into code; decryption is of course the opposite, coded text being turned back into readable text (the official term for which is "plaintext"). This unfortunately means that these words can't be used interchangeably with "show/hide text". If you wanted to get creative in that regard, I would recommend "Open/Close [name]." Optionally, instead of "Close [name]" you could use "Access granted".
As for the idea itself — I like it! I'm sure there are more than a few shape-shifting entities on this site, but something I think makes this one stand out is the fact that this thing maintaining a human form has the drawback that it requires food to survive (namely human meat in this case), despite which it apparently prefers to remain in human form. This sort of concept would be great for a Tale if it is written well.
On that note, all in all, I'm really glad you used the Sandbox for this — a lot of people don't, and the "Lowest Rated Pages" section of the wiki is constantly full of examples of exactly that. I'm glad you're taking the opportunity to get some feedback before making your first SCP public. The concept, as I said, is interesting, and I hope that it's refined to the point where it's well-received by the time it's posted.
Well, thank you! I've taken what you've said and made some adjustments.
Interesting enough, the meat it needs wasn't originally just going to be human. Let's say, it wanted to shift into a small animal, like a dog. It would need a supply of dog meat to keep it alive. The meat it needs would have been based on what it shifted to.
Though, that idea seemed a bit too mixed up.
Also, what do you mean "Great for a tale"? I've really only know about the SCP stuff for a couple of days.
As far as I know the Tales are short stories set in the same universe and using certain SCP's. I haven't read a whole lot of them myself, so I'm not, like, an expert on it or anything. By "great for a tale," I really meant the takeaway to be that it would make for an interesting threat in a work of fiction.
The meat it needs would have been based on what it shifted to.
That's a really neat idea! It would definitely explain why it would prefer to stay in human form. They're all over the place!
I should try and figure out how to re-employ that fact into the post. I don't want to add another Addendum, but that seems to be the place it would end up. Possibly another test was done to see what it would/wouldn't eat
I should try and figure out how to re-employ that fact into the post.
I dunno. At this point it seems like a human version of SCP-034 (Obsidian Ritual Knife).
But honestly, could that be a bad thing? I do have some good feelings about it, and I feel that it could be received well if I fixed a few more fine details.
Sorry about the spam buildup. I may try, see how it fairs. If it gets bad responses, I'll do a major re-vamp of it
King K, instead of posting multiple comments in succession, please edit your previous post using the "edit" function under the "options" tab to the lower right of every comment. That prevents spam buildup, and it's in the rules.
But honestly, could that be a bad thing?
…yes? 034 may have a high rating, buuut that's largely due to it being posted in 2009, when standards were much lower than today. And 9 years is a long time to accumulate upvotes from new people trying to read all the articles in numerical order.
I do have some good feelings about it, and I feel that it could be received well if I fixed a few more fine details.
Best not to make assumptions. If you want to try posting this to the mainsite to see how well it does though, feel free.
I'm posting this as a new post instead of in the previous reply chain, because it's getting quite long.
These errors will go chronologically from the top to the bottom of the page.
Special Containment Procedures
The first paragraph gives the impression that SCP-XXXX is currently uncontained, and I couldn't figure out whether it was contained until reading Addendum 01, where it says it is contained at site 19. You might want to move the first paragraph to the end of the containment procedures, just to improve flow. Also, some of your other wordings make it sound like the SCP is not contained, which I will cover now.
"SCP-XXX's unit must have a feeding door"
When you say "must have" it sounds like plans to build a unit, rather than a description of an existing unit. I would use "has" instead of "must have"
You may even consider removing this sentence entirely. This is one of those cases that it should be obvious that there is a feeding door, and that it is locked from the outside.
From How to Write an SCP
Also, don't put stuff in your containment procedures that is self-explanatory. If your article concerns a living creature, you can assume it's fed. That doesn't need to be in the containment procedures unless its diet is special.
As such, the part about raw meat should be left in, but the other part is unnecessary.
"Also, let it be known"
This is OK wording, but I might use something like "Note that SCP…" IMO it sounds a little more professional that way.
"This is the only method that"
Surely it's the only known method.
"that keeps it docile without using fear."
Intimidation works better than fear in that sentence. If you prefer using fear, you might reword it
"that keeps it docile without inciting fear."
Description
This revision still has many instances of "it's" where it should be "its," etc. I will be noting each of those in my review, and hopefully in the future you'll have an easier time catching them while proofreading.
""shift" form to that of human"
that of a human
"moments, likely do to it's size."
its
"situated on it's mid-section"
its
"to, giving it's trick away"
its
"aforementioned mouth on it's stomach."
its
""shift" returns to it's original age"
its
"Another interesting discovery that has been made is that,"
This sounds somewhat unprofessional. I might say "it has also been discovered that."
The key problem here is "interesting." Try to avoid words that aren't strictly necessary, unless you have a specific purpose for adding them.
Addendums
", and has listen them appropriately"
listed
(In site 23)
"after a being found un-secure"
"after being found unsecure"
"Though here, it was discovered"
What are you trying to say with "Though here?" Its meaning is unclear. I might just remove it and start with "It was discovered"
"It's punishment"
Its
"This may seem cruel, but"
This makes it look like you're talking to the reader, rather than writing a report. You can just say "This was necessary to…"
(Site 19)
"and has shown no sighs of"
no signs of
Addendum 02:
"causes it's ██████ to shut down"
its
"magnetic force as to be"
has to be
"less then the magnic force"
less than the magnetic
The redaction in this section is quite heavy, and gives the impression that the writer doesn't actually know what is behind the black squares. You may want to consider removing some or all of them.
I would recommend removing the 2nd and 4th ones, considering those probably wouldn't give any advantage to "rival facilities."
In my opinion, the footnote here should be in the addendum, and the sentence with the footnote should be the footnote. I think that would make it look more like an actual report.
Note: It probably looks like I'm being mean with the "its and it's," but I legitimately listed every error I could find. As such, you should take it as a good sign that most of your errors are quite minor!
Details
While in its "Shifted" state, SCP-XXXX has the ability to communicate in the English language, though its voice will not change to match the individual it has shifted to, giving it's trick away to anyone who knows the individual.
This is cool, but what does its voice actually sound like? It's not mentioned anywhere in the article. Also, if it has no mouth in its "mannequin" form, can it only speak when shifted?
and into the population. It was later found and escorted to a more secure facility
This implies that Site 17 is not secure, which isn't (or shouldn't be) true. You could change this a couple ways. What I would do is: "to a more secure containment cell"
It prefers to stay in a human form, but, while in that "shift", it runs the risk of rapidly aging. The only countermeasure it has to this is the consumption of humans, through the aforementioned mouth on it's stomach.
Does this mean it can stay shifted for more than 96 hours if it eats? If so, you might want to explicitly state this.
Once again, it was able to escape containment due to the actions of a lazy employee, who SCP-XXXX stole the outfit of and consumed.
It might benefit the flow of your article to mention if this employee was a D-class, or researcher or etc. As it is now, that basically looks like:
"it was able to escape containment due to the actions of █████████,"
Hopefully this feedback will be helpful. Happy writing!
Oh my God, I feel ridiculous. I saw this, edited the draft, and still posted the unedited draft.
Well, this flopped.
Though, seriously, I appreciate this list man. It's difficult to do full proofreading on a cracked phone, so I end up slipping over the auto-corrected "its" or the misspellings I make.
