Standard Foundation Dictionary?

Summary:

Why has no one done this yet?

Standard Foundation Dictionary?

Foursevenniner 24 Aug 2017 21:46

I've read around 1000 to 2000 SCP's before I joined the SCP-wiki (Which was two weeks ago) and one thing I noticed was that that people used a lot of different terminology and had different definitions for stuff. Despite the amount of quality control that I've seen at the wiki I was surprised that there was no "Official Foundation Dictionary". So i think that there should be a official page that explains all the fancy words that people use. SCP 1985 explained various K-class scenarios and SCP 2626 explained diffrent types of Cognitohazards and i think that they should be put into the "Official Foundation Dictionary" if one is ever made, or if not could be added to the "Background page" of the wiki

+ K-class scenarios

From SCP-1985
XK-class Type Alpha (scorched earth) end of the world scenarios
XK-class Type Omega (religious) end of the world scenarios
CK-class restructuring scenarios
AK-class "madness" end of the world scenarios
EK-class "consciousness-loss" end of the world scenarios
NK-class "grey goo" end of the world scenarios
RK-class "out-competition" restructuring scenarios
SK-class dominance shift scenarios
IK-class collapse of global civilization scenarios
[REMAINDER CLASSIFIED]
The remainder classified part could be added onto.

+ Cognitohazards

From SCP-2626
Alpha-class
Alpha Class Cognitohazards induce mildly incapacitating sensations or beliefs in some or all of those exposed.

Beta-Class
Beta Class Cognitohazards induce moderately incapacitating sensations, beliefs, or experiences in some or all of those exposed.

Gamma-Class
Gamma Class Cognitohazards induce severely incapacitating or painful sensations, beliefs, or experiences in some or all of those exposed.

Delta-Class
Delta Class Cognitohazards cause death for some or all of those exposed.

Epsilon-Class
Epsilon Class Cognitohazards confer anomalous abilities in some or all of those exposed.

+ Positions

Agent(Level 2)
Junior Researcher(Level 1)
Security(Level 1)
Senior Researcher(level 3)
Containment Specialist(Level 3)
Foundation Technicians(Level 1)
Foundation Technicians Manager(Level 4)
MTF Commander(Level 3 to 4 Depending On Assignment)
Foundation Antimemetics Team (Level 2)
Foundation Amnesics Team (Level 2)
Foundation Internal Investigations Department (Level 3)
Foundation Ethics Department(Level 3)
MTF Member(Level 2 to 4 depending on assignment)
Foundation Cognito Hazards Team(Level 1)
Foundation Survey Team(Level 1)
Foundation Deep Cover Agent(Level 2)
Hazardous Enviroment Team(Level 2)
Mid-Level Researcher(Level 2)
Foundation Contingency Team(Level 5 on activation)
Overwatch Command Operator(Level 4)
Site Situation Room Operator(Level 3)
Site Situation Room Commander(Level 3)
Analysts and Codebreakers Team(Level 2)

There should also be definitions for amnesics and memetics and other stuff too, and for those of you that say the background page has enough information it doesn't really.

Re: Standard Foundation Dictionary?

Modern_Erasmus 24 Aug 2017 22:26

http://www.scp-wiki.net/mackenzie-glossary

It's a bit out of date but we do have this. A lot of the more esoteric or unimportant designations are also up to headcanon (i.e. Some people use Class A amnestics as the weakest form and some as the strongest generally used form).

Last edited on 24 Aug 2017 22:28 by Modern_Erasmus Show more

Re: Standard Foundation Dictionary?

Zyn 25 Aug 2017 05:46

Agent(Level 2)
Junior Researcher(Level 1)
Security(Level 1)
Senior Researcher(level 3)
Containment Specialist(Level 3)

These are covered by: http://www.scp-wiki.net/security-clearance-levels

Re: Standard Foundation Dictionary?

Petrograd 26 Aug 2017 05:56

It's up to you if you'd like to create one. Someone suggested a broader glossary (or at least an update to MacKenzie's), and I think having a source of information people could pull from is a decent idea. But it won't be standard because it won't be canon.

One of the central ideas of the wiki is that there is no canon. It's literally just how the site's built, and there's no easy way to change that. When you mention quality control, it's all in the upvote system: Poor grammar or boring writing get downvoted and deleted. Perfectly matching your definition of 'SK-class scenario' with existing definitions only matters if everyone else remembers and gets angry, and 9 times out of 10 the existing definitions clash anyway. (That's before we even get into intentional egregious canon differences, like how the Foundation handles D-Class, or who the O5s are, or what exact influence/resource/tech level the Foundation operates on, or the multiple different SCPs that have already ended the world.)

I get more use out of things like this O5 dossier or this MTF list, which aggregate existing info but leave room for conflicting definitions, rather than things like the amnestics guide, which is itself a tale rather than a guide. Those take a lot of work, though. (Edit: Both are valid ways to get upvotes, though!)

Last edited on 26 Aug 2017 06:01 by Petrograd Show more

Re: Standard Foundation Dictionary?

Wils 27 Aug 2017 18:00

It's a great idea until someone downvotes your article because you didn't follow the dictionary…

Re: Standard Foundation Dictionary?

(account deleted) 31 Aug 2017 20:44

A standard dictionary seems pretty neat, and I beleive it would make articles much more understandable. It'll also finally settle the difference between memes and cognitohazards. However, as Wils points out, people that follow the rules to a T might downvote articles that appear to omit or attempt to create new words/phrases. I do approve of the idea, but it's not without issues.

Re: Standard Foundation Dictionary?

MaliceAforethought 01 Sep 2017 09:08

The difference has been sorted out for as long as those words have existed. A meme is a piece of information, usually part of a wider culture. A cognitohazard is something that can harm you if you sense it in some way. An infohazard (for the record) is something that can harm you if you know about it - it is hazardous information.

Re: Standard Foundation Dictionary?

Wils 03 Sep 2017 10:28

And of course both exist in real life.

Cognitohazard - smelling something gross can make you nauseous.

Infohazard - knowing the whereabouts of a large sum of cash can increase your risk of harm from people who want to find it.