Schrodinger
http://scpsandbox2.wikidot.com/plight
Don't go too crazy on me please
Schrodinger
Forum
» Writing Help / Help: Drafts and Critiques
» Schrodinger
Summary:
My first SCP file story, I'm making it seem more like it's currently happening, so the file changes and new entries are added, but I hope you like the draft.
Site -.
In site what?
Two guards are to be stationed outside of its room at all times. No one other than authorized personal personnel can come into the room.
What is the reason for any of this?
SCP-2353 is a young male of unknown origins.
A male what? Human? Dolphin? Centipede?
We can deduce he was born in America and has spent part of his life as a homeless person living from place to place.
Where in America? How can that be "deduced"? Also, avoid "we".
Not much else is known about him but our investigation will continue.
This sentence doesn't need to exist.
called [DATA REDACTED]
a broken down house
Out of tone.
seemed like a gathering point of teenagers
Out of tone.
the SCP hotline
There's no way this could exist.
had received reports of an artifact that was making people [DATA EXPUNGED].
Making people bake cookies?
No further information is known about the incident.
A squad
A squad of what?
was sent to the area to retrieve the artifact. when Instead, they found SCP-2353 holding onto it.
The boy turned to look at the containment group
Out of tone.
he immediately dropped
Out of tone.
what seemed like a [DATA EXPUNGED].
What seemed like a bowl of chocolate pudding?
It fell to the ground
Out of tone.
and [DATA EXPUNGED].
…and did a little dance?
The containment group quickly rushed in
Tone error.
escorting the boy
Wrong tense.
off the premises
A little off-tone.
the [DATA EXPUNGED]
The pudding?
swiped the area.
I'm assuming you meant to say "swept the area". That would be out of tone.
to the facility
Which facility?
examined thoroughly to see if there were any abnormalities with the child.
This doesn't make sense.
He is abruptly 11 to 12 years old
Did you mean approximately?
seems Caucasian
What evidence do you have that might suggest otherwise?
he doesn’t seem to react quickly to visual or audio signals meaning he might lack a bit in motor functions, other then light malnutrition and dehydration we don’t see anything else wrong with him, we were lead to believe the artifact would cause horrid results upon its victims, and yet this child was holding onto it without a single scratch, that alone is a mystery.
Run-on sentence.
yet I and the rest of the examiners have this strange feeling that there is more than what meets the eye.
We will continue the examination as per-usual and see if the child is 100% percent good to go.
seeing his tattered clothing show that perhaps he is homeless and not of around this area.
I can't understand this.
We had made an astounding discovery, despite putting him in the facility’s MRI scanner, no images of the boy show up, it was as if we were scanning thin air, we checked to see if the machine was working properly, and to our surprise the machine was working perfectly, after this we tried taking pictures of the now labeled SCP-2353 and just like the MRI scanner, all we got were pictures of the back wall.
Large run-on sentence.
The containment procedures and description are too short and you have a lot of run-on sentences. I suggest reading these guides to help you with your writing.
I get you are going for a format screw, but if you don't give an in-universe reason, it seems like you are skewing the standards just for the sake of it (it is good to skew them for artistic reasons). Either give one (eg. the database suffered a problem and only the initial logs from the crew sent are available or the more cliche at this point "it has affected our system with its irreality") or just make it a straight up tale.
The other major problem is the tone of the Addendum, especially the first one. Consider a police officer that just conducted a raid of a building: what she writes in the report or even what she declares for her superiors on-site is not going to sound the same way as what she says to her fellow officers.
Your use of expungement leaves much to be desired. Good expungement can be used for horror, but when used excessively (as it is here), it feels like one is reading MadLibs. This can be partially solved if you give an in-document reason about irrelevant data being above the reader's clearance, but not abusing the feature would be better.
As a final side note, don't in the modern Western world, there's very little ways to know for sure in which country a person was born. There are a few factors that can help to know where someone has lived, but the place of birth is effectively unknowable unless they come from isolated tribes.
I don't see this plot as fundamentally unworkable, but you need to better think about how you present it. Telling a good story through incremental field reports is fine, but they need to read like something written by the characters, not just putting regular prose in their mouths. For example:
we were lead to believe the artifact would cause horrid results upon its victims, and yet this child was holding onto it without a single scratch, that alone is a mystery. Perhaps the object wasn’t what we were looking for, yet I and the rest of the examiners have this strange feeling that there is more then what meets the eye,
Those simply don't strike me as something you'd regularly in a report; it is alright for those to be less dry than a regular document, but you need to balance them out. Maybe in an "audio log" or as the personal log of the agent, but those are also tricky to write well.
@MrAnakinSpecter: Um, thanks for the critique….wasn't expecting the whole thing to be a mistake…guess I'll go revise it.
You can reply to my message without making a new post by clicking the "reply" button under my original post.
And the whole thing isn't a mistake! It just needs revision. No one is perfect. :)
/forum/t-1229516/schrodinger#post-
page revision: 3, last edited: 22 Sep 2018 03:57
