SCP-XXXX - Heterophyes Neurensis

SCP-XXXX - Heterophyes Neurensis

mysteriousOutsider 12 Nov 2018 15:54

Hi, everyone. I'm a first time SCP writer. I wrote this while procrastinating on writing a real (much more important) scientific paper.

http://scp-sandbox-3.wikidot.com/mysteriousoutsider

Please let me know what you think.

Re: SCP-XXXX - Heterophyes Neurensis

OccultistMave 12 Nov 2018 16:17

I really like this, it has some pretty good body horror (despite how medical it presents its self). But there are some sentences that read weird

SCP-XXXX is Heterophyes neurensis, a species of parasitic flatworm for which humans are the primary host.
Post-mortem dissection of specimens reveals that the majority of their bodies are composed of their own neural tissue.

The interview log is also kinda weird since it changes from XXXX-K using "I" to using "We" for seemingly no reason (if it's the SCP talking it's not obvious and looks more like a mistake.)

Staff post - info - open

fieldstone 12 Nov 2018 17:02

Edna Granbo, this feedback needs more information to be helpful. Pointing out one or two grammar errors is not going to help the author improve their draft as a whole; please try to leave thoughts about the overall article and especially about what it would need to do well on the mainlist. Remember that reviewers focus on threads with no responses, so having a reply like this can prevent the author from getting a full critique.

Last edited on 12 Nov 2018 17:03 by fieldstone Show more

Re: Staff post - info - open

OccultistMave 12 Nov 2018 19:47

I think it is good enough for a main list post at this point, it just had a few small problems with it. So for future reference should I ignore drafts like that so the crit team can take a look at them or post like I did while making it clear that I think it's good enough for the main list?

Re: Staff post - info - open

Zyn 13 Nov 2018 01:59

I think it is good enough for a main list post at this point, it just had a few small problems with it

You didn't really address either point in depth, though. How do the quoted sentences read "weird" to you? Were they difficult to parse? Overcomplicated in terms of sentence structure? Generally just too jargon-heavy? How can the author improve them so they don't read "weird"?

Additionally, what about the body horror did you like in particular? Do you feel like the medical terms can be trimmed down a bit so that the more interesting aspects are the focus?

So for future reference should I ignore drafts like that so the crit team can take a look at them or post like I did while making it clear that I think it's good enough for the main list?

Given that staff members have needed to address problematic feedback from you multiple times, it might be better to hold off on posting the first review if you don't really have much to say about it.