Generally if you ask for help on more than one SCP article at a time, you'll turn away reviewers. Try to stick to just asking about one per thread.
I gave you a quick skim. These are all kind of bland.
A recurring issue is unnecessarily-specific containment procedures, often without a logical reasoning behind the specifics. Why does the furniture have to be a desk, as opposed to a table? Why the dude at Site-01, rather than anyone else of similar authority and standing? Why must the storage be at a site warehouse as opposed to something more secure? I recommend reading this guide on containment to get a feel for how to write more logical, resource-conserving procedures.
You've also got some information in the descriptions that don't make sense retrieval-wise. Keep in mind that as the author, you know the entire story, but the Foundation needs to have discovered what it knows about the SCP object through observation and experimentation. You'll need to convince your reader that someone with no prior knowledge whatsoever of the anomaly managed to somehow figure out (not magically know!) all the information you've got in the article.
As such, how would someone at the Foundation be able to empirically and reliably come to a conclusion like "To non-living individuals (i.e. Spirits, Specters, Ghosts, Poltergeists, Astral-projections, etc.) SCP-XXXX appears as a solid black box (█)."
I recommend getting the base idea of all of these polished up in the Ideas and Brainstorming forum before you try fixing the drafts. Go to that forum, post a quick summary of the concepts you want to write up (don't link the draft unless someone asks), and reviewers there can help you make the ideas more interesting and give you some advice on structuring the eventual article for smoothness of reading and narrative, and if the concepts are draft-worthy to begin with.
