Seminars and Workshops Hub

Seminars and Workshops

Presented by the SCP Foundation Wiki

Welcome to the hub page for the SCP Foundation Wiki's Seminars and Workshops, an interactive learning platform on various topics including critique, writing techniques, wiki culture, and more!

On this page, you will find a calendar for upcoming seminars/workshops and notes compiled by staff of previously held seminars¹. Live updates on seminars and workshops can also be found in this forum thread.

If you have any questions/concerns, please direct them to taylor_itkin.

[+] FAQ [+]

What are they?

Workshops and seminars held by various staff members on various topics. Critique, writing, dialogue, and more! The seminars are an interactive learning platform, and include activities and discussion to help keep everyone engaged and learning.

When are they?

Each workshop/seminar will be announced at least 1 month in advance of the event itself in this thread, so you will be able to keep up with the schedule.

Who leads the workshops/seminars?

Anyone on staff may be the host of the event. The host of each seminar/workshop will be announced with the event's announcement itself.

How can I participate?

The workshops and seminars will be held in #workshop on the same IRC network that #site19 is held on.

---

Seminar/Workshop Calendar

Date	Time	Workshop/Seminar	Host
October 12, 2019	5 PM EST	How to Hecking Read (Critically)	SoullessSingularity

[+] PREVIOUS SEMINARS/WORKSHOPS [+]

• Many Critique Seminars - held by taylor_itkin
• Dialogue Writing Workshop - held by taylor_itkin
• Writing Memorable/Interesting Characters - held by AdminBright
• Quick-Crit Seminar - held by taylor_itkin
• Finding/Using CC-Compliant Images - held by Elogee FishTruck
• Writing Flash-Fiction SCP Articles - held by A Random Day
• Improving Your Prose - held by The Great Hippo
• Nitpick Critique - held by taylor_itkin

---

Seminar/Workshop Notes

[+] Nitpick and Line-By-Line Critique [+]

Nitpick and Line by Line Critique Seminar

• Today, we will be learning to identify drafts that are eligible for line-by-line critique, differentiating them from drafts that aren't, and how to effectively and efficiently go about giving this type of critique.
• Taking into account how the forums actually work (butterfly squad priorities, actual functionality, etc), what kinds of threads, without looking at the draft, might already be more eligible for nitpick-critique than others?
  • Experienced users (those with authorial experience)
    • A more experienced author is more likely to know where to take their draft, right?
  • Clearly conveyed ideas or ideas with promise
  • Those with a list of specific areas of concern for their draft. Usually means they know how the crit process works, and thus have a decent idea of how to write an SCP.
  • Drafts with lots of replies from both critters and OP, as it generally is of higher quality (each reply is either new crit or the author responding to critique)
    • If a draft has already received criticism, the author has had a chance to act on it, revise their draft, and make it better.

What are some key features of the draft itself that might make it eligible for nitpick or line-by-line critique?

• No or few SPaG errors
• I like to be able to read the first paragraph or section of the description and have a decent idea of what they're talking about, shows they can write concisely
• Formatting
  • Good formatting shows they took the care and time to correctly and interestingly format the article
  • even if its a format screw, you want consistency (if that's the desired effect of the format screw, at least!)
• Good dialogue
• Narrative - one that's engaging and interesting.

Dealbreakers

• no clear direction or narrative
• zero clinical tone
• fundamentally flawed concepts won’t be helped by a line by line critique

Exercise

• General consensus chose the one that is slightly more refined
• Start with ConProcs
  • You'll often see critters saying "these can save someone's life in-universe, so make sure everything is clear and precise." So we want to make sure everything in the containment procedures is *absolutely* necessary
  • Over-explaining, like some_author_dude said, is a really big thing that a lot of people mess up with. ConProcs (and entire documents, tbh) are all about being cold and concise.

containment procedures are not testing procedures. And while it's not technically incorrect to include either of these lines in the containment procedures, there's also no reason they can't go somewhere else.
* Fluff Text is Unnecessary
* Very oddly specific things definitely shouldn't be included unless absolutely necessary, because they add nothing new
* it's implied that the Foundation is going to feed things that need to be fed, give them water.
* 'To ensure safety', 'as per standard protocol', 'for extra measure', etc
* Unnecessary as it is all implicit
* we're aware this is all to ensure safety, or if something is standard protocol, why would we need to list it as such?
* Also, redacting or blackboxing stuff in the containment procedures is usually a big no-no, except for possibly doing it to a Site location.
* `Scp-x appears to be`
* Phrase is basically kryptonite
* There is absolutely 0 reason to tell us what your anomaly *appears* to be when you could tell us what it is.

Description

• Now a lot of people will try to focus on their narrative more than describing the actual anomaly - this is a common pitfall I've encountered in a lot of drafts.
• Make sure that the article is actually telling you what the anomaly is - you don't want that as a part of the mystery, unless that's the point of the article

Addenda

• Usually Logs and Reports
• Progresses the narrative
  • Needs to be there for a reason
  • If it isn't then it's fluff. And fluff does nothing but add pointless reading.
• If it's an interview, make sure it's got solid dialogue

Nitpicking

• When you give critique, you want to be explaining WHY what you've pulled has issues in it.
• Don't just say 'this is a problem', tell them why it's a problem and if you can, offer a way that the author might be able to actually fix it.
• Additionally, remember to be kind.
• Go through every detail, make sure you get core SPaG errors, tear apart the narrative if you have to - make sure everything works, everything is flowing together, there aren't any major potholes, etc.

[+] Improving Your Prose held by The Great Hippo [+]

Improving Your Prose

Prose is a fancy word for 'the text of a story'. That's all it really means — the words, sentences, and paragraphs that make up your story

• What makes prose 'good'? It communicates information to the reader, is engaging, and — again — looks nice.
  • Good prose varies radically from case to case. What matters is that it functions
• Develop your ability to write functional prose before you start working on 'amazing' prose.

There is *NO SUCH THING* as 'talent'. You are not 'born' good at prose. You *BECOME* good. Behind every piece of writing that works are a thousand pieces that don't. You get good at writing by being awful at writing. It takes practice and persistence. Writing is a muscle. Strengthen yours by exercising it.

BREVITY.

• Do not waste the reader's time. The less words you use, the stronger the prose becomes for it. Functional prose is brief and to the point.
  • Be functional before you try to be 'clever'.
• This is a difficult trick — but it works really well depending on the situation — you can actually use word-choices by the 'narrator' (in a sense) to communicate anger.
• Be suspicious of all words that end in -ly.
  • IE, if you can use one word to get something across, *use one word*. Don't modify it with an adverb
  • Another thing that helps 'shorten' sentences and give them a stronger punch: Get rid of words that end in -ing.
    • Use it too much, and the prose starts to feel sing-songy and samey.

POSITIVE STATEMENTS.

• Affirming what is true is often stronger than affirming what is false.
  • Using words like "Not" to invert the meaning of a word makes things a little less 'strong', and makes the reader have to think a little longer to 'understand' what
• Don't sacrifice clarity for brevity.
• This rule can, and often is, broken, depending on what you're doing. SCP articles will often focus on what something *isn't* as a way of manipulating negative space, for example!

CONCRETE OVER ABSTRACT

• Whenever you can be *concrete* about something, be concrete. Whenever you can *get specific*, get specific.
  • This is what people (sometimes) mean when they say 'show, don't tell'.
  • It's especially potent to focus on various senses — one sense that often gets *incredibly* overlooked is the sense of smell.
    • Describing smells to the reader is a great way to evoke certain atmospheres, places, feelings, or ideas.
• NOTABLY, this is one of the few times where 'brevity' takes a back-seat — because this expands prose, rather than shrinks it.
• *Avoid saying what things appear to be. This falls under 'positive assertions': Tell me what something *is*, not what it *might* be.

IMPLICIT VS. EXPLICIT

• What the reader is told versus what the reader figures out on their own
• When the reader realizes something happened (rather than being *told* it happened), it makes it hit much harder. It makes it feel personal; like something that belongs to the reader.
• When you leave those 'blank spaces' for the reader to fill, the reader will always fill them with things far, far more interesting than anything you could
  • • Explicit and implicit are not *binary*
    • All writing is both implicit and explicit.

SIMPLE VS. COMPLEX, HOMOGENOUS VS. NON-HOMOGENOUS STRUCTURE

• Avoid having three sentences in a row with identical structure. Break it up with at least one simple sentence.
• Your compound/complex sentences should not contain more than *three* clauses.
• If you're using more than two commas in a sentence (again, unless you're talking about lists), your sentence is probably getting too complex.
  • What you want to avoid is too many clauses in a single sentence
• Exception: Repetition and Symmetry
  • These cases are more or less motifs
    • Repetition and homogenous structure isn't *always* bad. It's just bad when it feels 'accidental'.

[+] Dialogue Workshop held by taylor_itkin [+]

Dialogue Workshop

• Why might someone include dialogue in an article?
  • humanization and making your characters feel more real.
  • In order to introduce thoughts and competing ideas
  • conveying what someone does and does not know
  • To show a character’s personality and inner workings to the reader
  • confrontation and conflict
  • Helps readers empathize, or project themselves onto the characters.
    • Writing is MUCH more effective when we can envision ourselves in the shoes of the character. ESPECIALLY horror. What's more terrifying than being able to see yourself in the same situation as your character, who is literally in a life-or-death scenario?
    • The best tales are often when you want to jump into the stories and live in the story.
• How do characters, or rather DIFFERENT characters, apply to writing dialogue?
  • different talking styles
  • different speech patterns, vernacular, dialect, etc.
  • Conflict
  • They can have different perspectives on the same thing which allows exploration of like different avenues of thought on the events
  • different goals
    • every character in a dialogue has some goal
  • all characters speak and feel differently.
• OK, now that we know that characters are all separate from each other in terms of speech, feelings, etc., how do we write that? What's something we need to do in order to be ABLE to write that?
  • know who the characters are
  • put ourselves in their shoes
  • get into the character’s head
  • the character’s relationship
  • what the characters are feeling in that moment
• Know who your character is before you write them.
• Come up with a character. Just a very basic, very simple character. Something along the lines of 'Detective who is 50 and solves crimes for fun'. Choose 1 detail in your short description. For that one detail, come up with 3 points in this person's history that led them to gain that trait. Examples from participants in seminar follow:
  • a traumatized knight who's mind and body are falling apart from a magical infection
    • becoming a knight
    • going to raid a dungeon
    • getting the magical infection/curse
  • 26-year-old otaku that really likes to sing but is too shy to do it
    • always liked to sing and was in the school choir
    • at a bad throat during one performance and ruined it
    • sings alone under the shower again for the first time in a few months
  • mother of 3 who enjoys pretending to be a cowboy
    • her mother used to watch western themed movies with her in her childhood
    • playing around with her children helps them go through the difficult times in school
    • she wishes she had a romantic relationship like she had seen on television
  • 32-year-old professional swim coach for the local high school.
    • as captain of the swim team when he was in high school
    • Had a father who often brought him along on fishing trips, and passed away when he was 10
    • Had some type of serious ankle injury pretty soon after leaving high school that stopped any hopes of competing.
  • an Indiana Jones wannabe in a world where the magic's died
    • wanting that escapist fantasy, in a world that's incompatible with it
    • so alienation. some poor kid who didn't have the funnest of childhood
    • probably doing their archaeology degree on scholarship - so it's both a matter of 'well, even if I am disappointed that archaeology isn't like my boyhood dreams, it's not like I can afford to do course-correction now'
  • Leeroy Jenkins, part-time detective, age 52, works around his neighborhood, reliving his glory days by solving local crimes
    • He solved a crime in his previous city which lead to him being threatened, so he had to move
    • Decided to stop working professionally
    • Moved to another neighborhood in the suburbs
    • solves local mysteries now
  • a bodyguard who’s still not over the death of the woman he loves
    • the death of the woman
    • investigating the death
    • becoming a bodyguard of an ambassador
  • a vigilante who often goes extralegal in order to stop murders in a desert village surrounded by wasteland
    • The reason why the vigilante is even a vigilante is because he was often threatened by road biker gangs and one day his friend and mother were both murdered in a robbery gone wrong
  • a 26 year old idealistic writer finding out how to truly capture emotion
    • was born in a fairly well-off neighborhood, always was told that he could do whatever he wanted
    • has a great number of writerly idols who were in similar circumstances
    • has never experience any sort of truly disheartening failure
  • Jason Strave, age 28, works in government business, paranoid, stressed and anxious to the point of twitching a lot
    • his father always acting paranoid and moving them around
    • being taught that nothing is safe and to trust nothing
    • how his mother was killed by her trusted friend when he was a kid
• In depth Character Analysis: “a mother of 3 children who really enjoys pretending to be an ol’ cowboy, acting out scenes of action and bank robberies with scenarios she painted. she used to watch western-themed VHS movies with her late mom and learned to appreciate that culture from there. getting a good laugh of her children and making them forget the difficulties of life, if not for a few moments, is probably the biggest joy she can find”
  • From here we have a basic character fleshed out. Where do you think we might go from here in order to flesh it out more? (Mind you, we are doing all of this consciously here, but when you are actually writing, if you keep this stuff in mind it will usually happen pretty naturally.)
    • • Flesh out some of the other character traits like we did for the one that was picked
        • Let's go with the children. So, we know she has children and makes them laugh with her cowboy stuff. Having children leads to MANY other traits in anyone's life.
          • shorter temper and less patience for antics or fuss
          • increased drive to succeed
          • feelings of obligations
          • single parenthood.
        • Those all provide for very rich and interesting complexities inside this character
        • So, let's put this woman into a scenario: Our character is in the grocery store. She has no reason to say anything to anyone, right? If our entire scenario is just 'in a grocery store', that is.
          • Unless she's new to the area
          • or has to greet the cashier
        • See the reasons for things needing to happen. Our character isn't going to say something unless she has a reason to. She's not going to go up to the cashier and say "fuck you" unless the cashier has done something that really warrants that. You never want to have any line of dialogue that isn't said with a PURPOSE.
          • What happens if we do?
            • Bloat
            • Fluff
            • Boring
            • Exposition
            • Like Tommy Wiseau
            • Dehumanizing
            • It becomes less real
          • Real is what makes it good
      • Everything that anyone has said, ever, in the history of the universe, has had a motive. Even if it's just “wow I gotta break the awkward silence”. But the difference is KNOWING, as the writer, what the motive is. Because that way it feels real to those who read it.
      • Let's get back to our character real quick and analyze how different character personalities affect motive.
        • Let's say that someone in front of her in the aisle drops a jar of pickles on the floor, splattering her shoes and pants with pickle juice. This person is around 12. The pickle juice got on our character, not the kid. Judging by our character's personality traits, how is she likely to react? Examples from seminar participants follow:
          • probably ask if the kid is okay
          • at first, she'd be like "ugh what the fuck", but then check on the kid, then motherly stern "don't run in the store!"
          • she wouldn’t lash out, but she would try to find the kid’s mom
          • she’d probably ask for the parents and then have a talk with them
          • she probably would have some awareness that she's in a social space, that there'd be other customers or store staff member seeing her
        • Why do you think she would react like this? Explain your reasoning. Examples from seminar participants follow:
          • because of her experience with kids, and a bit of short temper
      • Alright, good. Now let's think in terms of another character
        • A father who is there with his daughter and wife of 5 years. Same scenario, but with this character. Create your own traits for him based off what you have been told and see what you think his response would be. Examples from seminar participants follow:
          • Probably angry, because of the stereotypes of men being all "angry when even the slightest thing happens" that he grew up believing and also looking like a fool
          • if we talk about "a father who is there with his daughter and wife", then his "audience" is a lot more immediate.
          • his response would be shaped by what kind of expectation they have of him/what kind of father and husband he is
          • he’d give the kid a big, angry talk about responsibility and awareness in an attempt to teach his daughter what is and isn’t wrong
          • he’d be pretty stressed from going shopping with the whole family and this would kinda tip him over the edge but at the same time he would not want to blow up in front of his family
          • Thinking he's a rather passive go with the flow kind of guy. His wife might be a bit quicker to anger, but he just makes sure to tell a nearby employee. Maybe he's an artisanal pickle maker, and part of him was kind of happy to see the name brand destroyed
          • wife of 5 years and a daughter, so the marriage is still fairly fresh, but they still got productive enough to have a daughter…
• The Seminar included a role play activity, where 4 participants were asked to create characters then role play those characters, using dialog tags as one would use in writing. As the role play progressed, other participants were told to swap with previous participants, playing the same character. Several participants engaged in the activity as multiple different characters. The object was to demonstrate how writing different characters felt, due to the motives and experiences driving them.
• Tone and speech pattern:
  • How might, say, accents, vernacular, and dialect effect your writing? Examples from seminar participants follow:
    • • dialects have different words that aren't used elsewhere
      • They would cause the characters to think differently of each other, and adjust how they speak to compensate
      • different turns of phrases, sayings and idioms
      • It adds realism and depth to your characters. I’d write South Philly dialogue differently from say a southern drawl
    • Good Practice is to study the speech of the region you’re writing for.
    • How can you figure out the line between creating a character with an accent and creating a stereotypical character?
      • Comes down to content. For example, when writing a character from the deep south and using an exclamatory statement.
        • Bad: “Dadgum, that there be hotter than a 'coon on a tar road at noon!”
        • Better: “Damn, that there's pretty darn hot, I'd say”
          • A lot more subtle, a lot more toned down.
• The best advice for writing dialog to sound real: SAY IT OUT LOUD
  • Does it feel wooden or weird?
  • Revise it until when you say it aloud it feels and sounds like something that might actually come out of someone's mouth.

[+] Quick-Crit Seminar 2.1 [+]

Quick Crit/Concept Crit Workshop Seminar Notes

Seminar run by Taylor Itkin

• Intro: What is Quick Crit?
  • Quick Crit is crit that is quick
    • Quickly getting to the point and important flaws of a concept without wasting time on minor details or stuff like object class
      • essentially “not wasting your own time”
• Part One: Identifying When Quick Crit is Usable
  • Some things that might help you identify a draft that is eligible for quick-crit:
    • Before reading the draft:
      • • "please crit this" pitch/request is incoherent or confusing
        • SPaG
        • The way the draft writer “speaks”/types
        • The amount of previous work for the site
          • Someone with many failed articles or no posted articles is probably a more ideal recipient for quick crit.
          • Multiple weak drafts prior can also be a factor that should be taken into consideration
  • While reading the draft:
    • Clichés
    • No apparent or discernable narrative
    • weak concepts
    • Elements that do not contribute to article in any discernible way
    • Concepts difficult for new writers to attempt (controversial or delicate topics)
    • Lack of understanding of the foundation or other GOI involved
    • TOO scientific.
  • Dealbreakers for regular crit (“what? I can't give this a line-by-line, I don't even get it. Or care.”)
    • MAJOR narrative issues
      • Major plot holes especially
    • The article is boring
      • This can be due to a variety of reasons
  • Quick-crit should only be given to drafts that you feel do not deserve much more in-depth crit
    • Point out the issue, tell them why it is an issue, suggest a fix
      • It's better to tell the author that they need to fix the core of an article than spending time fixing all of their SPaG if the article is inherently flawed.
• Part 2: Giving Quick Crit
  • if you've been given critique, what's the #1 thing you want to feel that the critter did?
    • Help
    • Given their honest opinion
    • They have given you a direction to investigate/work on yourself
    • You never want to feel like you've been bullshitted.
      • Never sugarcoat, but never attack.
  • Critique isn't meant to be about tearing an article to shreds - it's about deconstruction and reconstruction, making an article BETTER than it is
    • Remember not to dictate the direction an author (especially a new author) should take when writing an article
      • Point in the right direction, don’t shove
  • Concept-crit and quick-crit are almost always going to be much shorter than a nitpick style critique.
    • Even when a critique is short, you want to make sure that the author actually feels like you read their draft.
      • This can be demonstrated by quoting the draft
        • Example of what needs improving/Specific errors, 3-5 quotes normally shows you read the draft in depth but are still identifying the core issue.
          • Quoting the same issue over and over can belabor the same point and should be avoided
  • After critting the examples (a good way of doing this is formatting the crit with the specific examples quoted and then critted at the top), the best thing to move to more overarching critique of the larger issue with the draft (Issues with narrative, concept, ect.)
    • Both state And Explain the issue. Give examples.
  • Following up crit with writing resources (such as a guide) from the wiki is a good way to finish
• Part 3: Activities
  • Activity 1: Quick Crit Eligibility
    • Here are two drafts. Read both drafts and choose which one you think is more eligible for Quick Crit. Write down your reasoning.
      • EXAMPLE 1: http://topia.wikidot.com/critshop-example-1
      • EXAMPLE 2: http://topia.wikidot.com/critshop-example-2
  • Activity 2: Giving Quick Crit
    • Once you have chosen the draft you think is more eligible, write out some Quick Crit for that draft.

Thank You for Reading! Seminars are run intermittently in #workshop and will be announced ahead of time on many SCP related channels (Including #site19 and the seminar hub).

[+] Creating Interesting and Memorable Characters - held by AdminBright [+]

Interesting Characters Workshop Seminar Notes

Seminar run by Dr Bright

Intro: There is no one way to write an interesting character

• If there was, everyone would write characters like that
• There a many ways to go about it

Part one: Mary Sues

• Mary Sues are characters that are flawless
• Flawless characters are often boring
• Often it is less about whether the character is boring but more about how this is treated in the story
• Flaws can be imposed on the character by the world around them

Part two: Conflict

• Characters rarely exist alone
• The easiest way to show who your character is, is by putting them against other characters
• Conflict is a great way for setting tone, showing goals and developing your characters
• The conflict should be natural and have personal stakes to everyone involved

Part three: NPCs

• All characters should feel like they are alive
• Of course some characters will be NPCs, only existing for a plot purpose
• Overall every character should feel like the protagonist of their own story, with their own quirks, relationships and goals

Part four: Nonhumans

• There are 2 ways to write a non human character (specifically their thought processes)
  • 1. Portray them as having a human mind, only from a a unique perspective
  • 2. Try to abstract their thought processes as much as possible
• Try to imagine: What could be the goals, interests and speaking patterns of a rock, a dog, a non-carbon based alien or the personified colour green?

Part five: Representation

• Representing different kinds of people is not only nice for your readers but also a great way to diversify your characters perspectives
• You don't need a reason to include different kinds of people
• You can write any kind of character but should refrain from writing about their perspective if you do not know it
  • Try to find input from relevant authors for such cases

Thank You for Reading! Seminars are run intermittently in #workshop and will be announced ahead of time on many SCP related channels (Including #site19 and the seminar hub).

---

Have an idea for a seminar or workshop? Tell us in this form.

---

Seminar Staff Team:

taylor_itkin (team lead), Edna Granbo, Gekkoguy, Raddagher, tupacofficial, Crashington, Elogee FishTruck, N_Aepic_Fael

Footnotes

1. coming soon!