SCP by Series
Feed
Stories
Discovery
Random
I really like the concept of the thing. Devouring live humans to become much nicer to be in, thus enticing more to enter it's gaping maw. are any thoughts on other SCP interacting with 002 remotely possible?
If you were to place a deceased human body inside SCP-002, would it have the same effect as on a living one?
Actually, it is stated in the document.
"Cadavers as well fail to produce any effect."
Cadaver is a word for dead body
I know this is a old comment, but to clear any confusion, the two comments before yours were made 9 years ago (in 2018). the author made edits to the entry after reading their comment, something you'll see a lot on the SCP wiki
bgamer1998, the post that you are responding to is close to five years old. What you are doing is colloquially known as "necroposting." This is not against the rules per se but necroposting with a comment devoid of content (colloquially known as "shitposting") is. You are doing the latter. Do not do this.
The next time will result in a formal warning.
OK, a minor formatting thing but I cant work out how to make it fit. This sentence:
SCP-002 resembles a tumorous, fleshy growth with a volume of roughly sixty cubic metres (60 m³) or two thousand (2000) cubic feet.
has a real internal consistency problem. The trouble is this:
SCP-002 resembles a tumorous, fleshy growth with a volume of roughly sixty (60) cubic metres (60 m³) or two thousand (2000) cubic feet (2000 ft³).
looks redundant. This:
SCP-002 resembles a tumorous, fleshy growth with a volume of roughly sixty cubic metres (60 m³) or two thousand cubic feet (2000 ft³).
Does not clarify the numbers correctly. This:
SCP-002 resembles a tumorous, fleshy growth with a volume of roughly sixty (60 m³) cubic metres or two thousand (2000 ft³)cubic feet .
Is even worse and this:
SCP-002 resembles a tumorous, fleshy growth with a volume of roughly sixty (60) cubic metres (m³) or two thousand (2000) cubic feet (ft³).
Just looks wrong. This may seem pedantic but, well, I am. (Teacher).
Any ideas?
Simple, delete what's in parentheses. The redundancy is what's catching your eye, so eliminate it.
I can kinda see your point, but I'm not that bothered by it. You might also want to run it by the original author, if they're still around.
Edit: Heh, looks like this is one of the articles from the old wiki, if not earlier. Personally, I'd say leave it. It may not be proper English, per se, but it's fluent Bureaucrat.
I wonder if we could add some horror to this…
Perhaps evidence is found of consciousness retained by people converted?
A brain or some equivalent inside each furnishing? Something a long those lines.
Immobile with no senses, but conscious; would be horrific.
I don't see the need to add anything else to it.
Feel free to write a Foundation tale if you wish to explore the concepts further.
Admin, SCP Wiki
Huh. I'm not really sold on either the article nor the pictures to be honest. The picture doesn't look particularly organic, certainly not like a tumourous roughly spherical shape. The article is all right, I can't tell if the pic is setting me off or not on the rest of it but I don't really get any chills or deeper thoughts than "it's an apartment that eats people". I agree with Kacen that some stories about it might make me feel it more.
In the Special Containment Procedures, it explicitly states that the main containing element is a power supply to the object.
It is never stated why.
according to the first sentence of the containment procedures: "to keep it in what appears to be a recharging mode."
if I'm guessing properly, it's not so much a measure to keep it contained, but to keep it active. in a semi-biological item like this one, that probably equates to keep it alive.
of course, given the emergency lighting effects, I could be entirely wrong. Maybe it'll fly off into the atmosphere or turn into a rolling weapon if it's not charging. just part of the mystery of the thing.
Consider the mind altering affects. Maybe it enters a more active hunting state.
I like the dread that seems to be linked to the tone of the article. Makes me think the researchers recorded the least information possible without compromising safety. Too much information can be harmful as well.
Everyone should thank SophosBlitz for fixing all the image links in over 50 articles. (I think he got them all…)
Now, about the TAGS on everything…
I would be much happier if he had gotten actual permission to edit those articles first. Some of the authors who preferred to use their own hosting have begun to complain.
Kids, hosting image files on the wiki is a guideline, not a rule. If you prefer to use your own external hosting and are prepared to deal with bitching if it fails, then you're perfectly allowed to do so. We generally only edit to replace images that have been lost entirely.
That said, sites like tinypic and imgur do have expiration dates on their filehosting. If you use a tinypic or imgur link, it will break, and it will have to be replaced at some point.
Some of the authors who preferred to use their own hosting have begun to complain.
seriously.
why.
Because they're allowed? Regardless how well meaning you are, it is not okay to make MAJOR edits to another author's page on this wiki without their permission.
EDITED FOR CLARITY.
I have pointed out that swapping out links for static images is akin to a spelling or grammar edit but I still got a warning about it. This is the first time I've heard of this interpretation. *shrug*
I can understand where the confusion would come from. How to write an SCP implies that you're supposed to upload the images, so I too rather thought it was strongly encouraged to prevent link rot.
For whatever reason, I'm sure the original authors know how to use the "Revert" and we can avoid consolidating en masse in the future.
I got a warning for adding a link from a report back to the originating article because the author apparently intended it to be "free range" or something.
In the end, "Standards Aren't" and this isn't the place to discuss this. (Of course, there really ISN'T one.)
In the end (…) this isn't the place to discuss this. (Of course, there really ISN'T one.)
Well, actually, there is... the policy forum.
So I went and posted something there.
This is actually a good point. So. Mod hat, listen to me and all.
All further comments on this issue are officially directed to that general thread right there, since they do not actually relate to SCP-002.
BELOW level 2? I am not understanding the reasoning behind this- is there a mixup of which way the numbers for access run in this scp?
Probably. This is one of the entries from the old wiki (pre-Wikidot), so it was written at a time when a lot of the details weren't quite as established as they are now.
I assume that is the reason for why about a 1/3 of a village was killed instead of issued amnesiacs. The amount of [DATA EXPUNGED] seemed a little excessive. Well until these issues are fixed, -1.
(account deleted)
