+Archived Containment Procedures
I clench every time I see a collapsible in the containment procedures. 99% of the time, it's not really necessary, in-universe because these are electronic documents and presumably they would updated by the Foundation in a manner befitting that, and out-of-universe because unless you've got some extremely complex story that demands something like this (and in this case, I don't think you do), this serves as filler. We should all be focusing more these days not necessarily on shortening our narratives, but rather cutting parts that are unnecessary. I can invest myself in a long article, but if it's weighed down by filler I'm going to check out.
06/██/1█
This article has huge problems with weird and pointless redaction. What exactly is the purpose of allowing a reader to know what decade something is occurring in but not the precise year?
There are currently 1██ instances of SCP-2352 on record
And why are we allowed to know that there are between 100-199 instances, but not the specific number?
With few exceptions, all broadcasts involve SCP-2352-1's diatribes on a range of topics, from the minutiae of its life to its limited knowledge of global events.
This is a little familiar for clinical tone. "Diatribe" has connotations of a bitter and somewhat vitriolic statement, and thus carries with it subjective value judgments. As do the terms "minutiae" and "limited knowledge." The Foundation feels like it's weighing in on the quality of the videos here when there's really no call to do that.
SCP-2352-1 is the corpse of Simon M█████████.
There is no reason to strike peoples' names like this. From the rest of the article, I know this person's state of residence, the number of letters in their hometown, and the circumstances of their death. I could likely find who this is with a ten minute Google search. Either the reader is cleared to know the name, or they shouldn't be, in which case, why leave a trail of easily-followable breadcrumbs?
age 1█ at time of death
Again; why?
SCP-2352-2 is a humanoid, extradimensional entity
The term "extradimensional" gets abused constantly around here (I too am an offender in that regard), but really, what does it mean, and why is it assumed that this thing is "extradimensional"? Do we really know enough about it to make that supposition?
; no vocalizations from the entity have been recorded.
See my previous complaints on why someone managing an electronic document wouldn't leave strikethroughs and such all over the place.
The video had garnered ████ views and ███ comments
Why on earth is that classified?
branded as a ♡ (Low Risk, Non-Malevolent) priority
This seems like a weird bit to throw in, and I'm not sure why it's here. The use of non-language symbols in this context seems like a bad idea for organizational consistency.