You say yourself that this SCP can deal nuclear-weapon levels of destruction, but it needs no special containment other a researcher's personal safe? I'm not following here. I'm going to clean the article up a bit, but I'm leaving substantiative changes up to the author.
SCP-403 / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» SCP-403
This is the discussion related to the wiki page SCP-403.
Yeah, the tone of this general article is all outta whack. It's too informal, mostly, but there's other little things that niggle about the way it's written.
Other than that, it seems fair enough.
I have many complaints, but here is one: what is a deflagration?
I didn't think it was a word either, but… surprise, surprise.
While I'm normally a fan of technical language, I think this is one case in which it is used badly, especially since the event is referred to as a "detonation" earlier in the article, which is a different event (read the first paragraph of the wikipedia article).
Maybe it's a "word-a-day calendar" problem.
Ooh. Idea. ^_^
For the record, magnetic fields are NOT fireproof. I'm just sayin'.
It sounds to me more like it's not fire, but *plasma*. Possibly *stellar* plasma. In other words, I think this thing is connected to a friggin' *sun*.
I'm new to this SCP foundation (and french)
and tthought i'd give it a try.
Thx for the clean up Heiden, i'll use this as a reference for any further entries (if i make any)
and the "deflagration" word is in french a detonation or explosion, thought it was a transparent word that had the same meaning in both our languages,
sorry for the misunderstanding.
[edit] after a quick look on wikipedia, it seems that "deflagration" is an english word, although the definition is slightly different from the french one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deflagration
Verily. It's "conflagration" in English.
Couldn't tell you why though, eh.
The addenda seem to use a lot of space to get across a little bit of information. The article could easily be shortened. Some of the language still needs to be edited and a few of the scientific concepts more realistically communicated. I think all of that could be done while retaining the essence of the SCP as it stands.
This entry has been reviewed and slated for editing. If you are the original author, please review this entry and comments, and see what changes could be made. Other users may edit ONLY:
- If the original author cannot be found/contacted
- If the original author gives permission
If no editing has been done on this entry after a period of two weeks, this entry will come under review for deletion. If you have any questions, please contact a mod or admin.
Start Date: 10/23/09
End Date: 11/6/09
At what point would other users be permitted to edit this? It looks like the original author hasn't been to the site since June.
I might have some ideas for this SCP, but I don't want to step on anyone's toes.
I was about to say it should be upgraded to Keter and have much stricter containment if it's going to cause a large-ass explosion next time, but then again, we do downgrade dangerous SCPs to Safe/Keter as long as no one screws around with it.
No, we downgrade them to Safe. The mere potential of destroying the world is one thing. If you put it in a desk drawer and nothing happens, it's Safe.
I meant Eucild. Sorry.
My only quibble is with the 'massive matter/antimatter explosion' bit.
While any appreciable reaction of total-annihilation matter/antimatter would count as 'massive', the wording suggests that it would equal a *whole lot* of it. A Kilogram of antimatter, if it was fully mixed with matter so that there was total annihilation of both, would basically erase half of the North American continent. There is a *lot* of energy locked away in matter.
It's just a minor…impression thing, and may only twig with me because of various science fiction stories that vastly underestimate the power of antimatter reactions. (I'm looking at you, Star Trek. Those photon torpedoes, if they really had several kilos of pre-mixed matter/antimatter, would devastate *planets*, not take shields down to 60%)
Anyone know if the original author of this is still around, because while I like the idea, the article needs some major cleanup for clinical tone, and I was wondering if I could ask to have a shot. If not perhaps a member of senior staff could give me the green light to have a go. I'd also vote for downgrading it to Safe. Lock this in a storage unit and nothing at all will happen.
Just a minor rewrite of some sections to make the tone more clinical and in-line with other SCP articles. The second person is used in several places, which just feels wrong, and 'detonation' and 'deflagration' are used seemingly interchangably, which again just doesn't sit right. I don't intend to change the effect at all, just smooth some edges.
Go ahead. If we don't like it, we can change it back
Admin, SCP Wiki
Done. I'll mention it on the update page too. I hope I didn't change things too much, I just felt that all the addenda material should be merged into the main description, as reading everything in bits and pieces got confusing. Like you said, you can always revert.
/forum/t-158209/scp-403#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06
