Talk:SCP Foundation

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the SCP Foundation article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 120 days

SCP Foundation has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: February 24, 2019. (Reviewed version).

A fact from SCP Foundation appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 May 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the fictional SCP Foundation (logo pictured) contains and documents thousands of paranormal objects?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2015/May. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/SCP Foundation.

Wikipedia

The description of SCP-426 will not be changed to the 1st person. SCP-426's cognitohazard only exists in-universe; Wikipedia articles must be written from a real world perspective. TL;DR: We're not changing SCP-426's description to the first person, so don't ask.

Horror GA‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Articles for creation GA‑class

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article was accepted on 25 March 2015 by reviewer Puffin (talk · contribs).

Internet GA‑class Mid‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

on the author of 173

The article mentions that SCP-173 was written by an anonymous user on 4chan, and while this is 100% true by nature of 4chan being entirely anomalous users, the SCP Foundation itself cites the author of SCP-173 as "Moto42", and that citation appears to have some basis in fact, although trudging through Wikidot to find it is breaking my brain. Someone should probably find some sources for that. casualdejekyll (talk) 16:03, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here, he identifies himself as Wesley Williams, aka "Moto42". In replies to that post, the SCP Wiki's admins state that they have confirmed Williams' claim. DS (talk) 20:43, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Their source is literally "dark magicks and darker science" so.... casualdejekyll (talk) 20:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you taking that literally? DS (talk) 01:18, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SCP's been rubbing off on me - just realized I wrote "anomalous" instead of "anonymous." And yeah, I did take that literally - because it suggests there's not an actual source beyond "this is the official answer" casualdejekyll (talk) 19:06, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Add more SCPs?

Personally, I think the section of the Wikipedia page which describes several notable SCPs is pretty lackluster. Not only is it missing several popular SCPs (such as 682, 049, 1471, etc. etc.) but it's mostly just Series I SCPs. As a big fan of the SCP wiki, I don't think this page does it justice. It wouldn't hurt to update the list a little bit, and include more SCPs, including some of the more recent, yet still popular SCPs, here a few suggestions:

SCP-3166 (by Tanhony)

SCP-993 (by Tanhony)

SCP-2030 (by PeppersGhost)

SCP-3078 (by UsernameAlias)

SCP-5031 (by PeppersGhost)

SCP-3000 (by Djkaktus)

SCP-2137 (by Max Landis)

SCP-049 (by Madison Sheppard)

Additionally, the page convenientally contains no mentions of Groups of Interest, or even the O5 Council. In a section of the page describing SCP-1609, they could've easily mentioned the GOC, but it was left out.

Like, come on here, this page doesn't do a good enclycopaedic job at explaining what the SCP Foundaition is. It just gives the briefest and most barebones description, and frankly I feel that it could do better.

I disagree this is needed, as the SCP Wiki itself is the place to go if you want a list of SCP articles. Additionally, any other SCP articles that could be added to this page would have to have been referenced in a notable third-party source. CoconutOctopus talk 16:56, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What CoconutOctopus said. A WP-article is supposed to summarize independent WP:RS. In-universe and WP:ABOUTSELF stuff mostly don't belong. The list of SCP:s are those that someone outside scp-wiki.wikidot.com bothered to notice, that's WP-style. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:32, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delirium49839, if you think the SCP list is barebone then I invite you to find sources for additional SCPs (particularly those in series 3 and 5+) and post them here for approval. I've actually been meaning to do this myself, although real life concerns keep getting in the way. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 16:50, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IP 63.208.139.106, one rule on wp-talkpages (WP:TPO/WP:TALK#REVISE) is that you don't change other people's edits, or your own after they have been replied to. This:[1] is fairly harmless, but please don't edit like that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:28, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I liked SCP-3166, but there's other wikis for that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:38, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

More SCP suggestions

I agree with what Delirium49839 has suggested. The current list of example SCPs is a bit, well, lacking. Personally, I think it should be more reflective of the more famous and popular SCPs, at least ones which are commonly discussed even outside of the SCP Wiki.

Now before anyone else points this out to me, yes I fully understand that we need links to reliable sources establishing real-world notability in order to justify including them on Wikipedia. Now if we can find such reliable sources, then I propose we add some of the following SCPs, and remove more obscure SCPs from the list:

SCP-2521 (ranked #2 in popularity after SCP-173, its unusual format may be worth noting)
SCP-049 (ranked #4 in popularity, was featured in SCP – Containment Breach)
SCP-096 (ranked #7, also featured in SCP:CB, almost as iconic as 173 and 682)
SCP-682 (ranked #8, arguably tied with 173 and 096 for the most notable SCPs to people with even a casual knowledge of the SCP Wiki)
SCP-106 (ranked #10, also appeared in the aforementioned video game)
SCP-914 (ranked #12, can provide an example of an SCP that's anomalous technology)
SCP-999 (ranked #15, the most well-known example of a completely docile and harmless SCP)
SCP-2137 (This SCP holds a lot of real-world notability, because the Hollywood screenwriter Max Landis created it. In fact, I think SCP-2137 is actually mentioned and sourced in Landis' article, so I don't know why the hell this one isn't already listed in the SCP article.)

And those are just a few of the more notorious SCPs, which I can think of off the top of my head. Now let me repeat this again, I already know that we need reliable sources and some level of real-world notability to add more SCPs to the list. But anyways, once we can find any such links to reliable sources on other sites, I think we should prioritize at least a few of these aforementioned SCPs over the more obscure ones. - AHI-3000 (talk) 03:25, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New article?

The SCP Foundation's Universe is massive and is not limited to just the SCP Foundation. So I was thinking, should we add more stuff? Perhaps create a central article known as the "SCP Universe" or something? For instance, Foundation "Groups of Interest" such as the UNGOC (United Nations Global Occult Coalition), the Wanderer's Library and by extension the Serpent's Hand, parallel Foundations and others, could potentially be created into their own articles under the umbrella article "SCP Universe". I really like the Foundation's writing and literature, but I am trying to keep a neutral perspective in saying this:

Basically, should we create a network of articles based on the SCP Universe sort of like, say, the Star Trek one? Or just fill this article with as much information as needed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robotikon (talk • contribs)

To add information to Wikipedia, it must be verifiable, and individual articles must be on a notable subject. This means that you'll have to find non-biased and reputable third-party coverage of whatever you want to add.

Since there's not nearly the wealth of sources that exist for Star Trek, one article should more than suffice. Readers interested in more detailed information on the SCP Wiki's various minutiae can always visit the wiki itself, just as one would visit a Trek fan wiki for minor trivia that they couldn't find on Wikipedia. - Novov T C 07:51, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If these things don't exist on the SCP-wiki already, consider Fandom (website). On WP you will run into problems with WP:FANCRUFT and WP:FICTION. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:16, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Phthonus

Hi! On Talk:Phthonus, I have started a discussion about whether or not to mention SCP-5167 on the Phthonus article, since that's been the subject of infrequent dispute over about a year. I figure anyone who's watching the SCP Foundation talk page would probably be interested in this discussion. casualdejekyll (talk) 16:45, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As an update, it seems the consensus in Talk:Phthonus was to decline the edit. Aismallard (talk) 06:15, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SCP-245

The SCP RPG, created/written by Doctor Cimmerian is a playable game that exists both in reality and in-universe as an anomalous object. The question is, should it be under the Games heading, or alongside all the other SCPs? G Rich 02 (talk) 11:14, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What sources do you have that supports it should be in the article at all? See the article sections you mentioned for inspiration. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:24, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Add SCP 49

SCP 49 has been a center of attention since the COVID19 pandemic. it has also been a meme. it could get a mention. Sincerely, Adigabrek^Talk 21:46, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source? DS (talk) 02:32, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New international branch

The Vietnamese branch was recently officialized, it can be seen at the bottom of the main page, or on the international wiki (branch list).
Disclosure: I am an SCP Wiki administrator.
- Aismallard (talk) 06:08, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aismallard, I've added in the Vietnamese wiki and updated the number of non-English SCP wikis. I'm sorry this took so long. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 00:13, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciated. Aismallard (talk) 01:17, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Listing the Founder?

In revision 1054072988, the infobox is edited to add "Aaron Siegel" as the founder. I have two issues with this:

It is easy for someone to confuse this as referring to a real person and not a fictional character. There is a real life person who originally created the SCP Wiki Wikidot site; their name is not Siegel.
While there are common articles and notions of lore, the official policy is "no canon", meaning that alternate interpretations of the Foundation in site writing is valid. While Aaron Siegel is the founder in several notable works (such as djkaktus's Ouroboros series), there are other tellings where Siegel does not exist. If Siegel was listed on an official page such as About the SCP Foundation, then I think this inclusion would be permissible (as long as it was clearly designated that this is the fictional founder of the organization).

On a similar note, I'm not sure "Secret Organization" is the best descriptor for what is pretty clearly a writing website. Aismallard (talk) 01:17, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, maybe that should be "The SCP Foundation is a collaborative writing wiki project..." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:17, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 1 December 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

‹ The template Edit semi-protected is being considered for merging. ›

change is to im in the scp 426 sentece to make more sense 136.228.52.12 (talk) 14:11, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Wikipedia is not part of the SCP fiction. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:15, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would like a job here

I know alot about scps and stuff I would be really use ful 2600:1017:B100:BD6B:A1F7:D1EA:E161:AE93 (talk) 18:27, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 December 2021

It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at SCP Foundation. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)

This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{ESp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

‹ The template Edit semi-protected is being considered for merging. ›

195.158.80.245 (talk) 12:56, 7 December 2021 (UTC)   fuc k[reply]