Left tab. The original idea was for markers which caused what was drawn to come to life, but I changed it to something weirder. I also modified the SCP itself to be more interesting, focusing on a story surrounding the SCP rather than the SCP itself.
So, this is an SCP that makes things, with an implied story that there are several people running around that were created by this thing. That's not a bad concept/narrative, but there are several issues throughout the draft. The biggest problem is that a lot of the sentences, especially in the description and recovery log.
The Addendum, up until the recovery log were interesting and kept me reading. Unfortunately, everything after that felt muddled and just confused me. I think reworking the second half of the addenda to make the narrative there a bit more clear would help. Right now it feels all over the place.
Anyways, I want to go through this on a line by line basis, and point out some of the minor issues:
I'm gonna stop my line-by line here, as I want to see the rest of the addenda reworked. The narrative presented in the interview was interesting, and I think keeping that kind of story telling works better than what's in the latter addenda. The interview has some mystery to it. It's intriguing, and that mystery is thrown away after the interview.
Thanks for the feedback, I've edited it as you stated. Also, I would like to point out and ask 2 things.
1. The human is consistent throughout usages of the tuba. This made more sense in the articles original form, but I can see how this new form could cause confusion. I will likely change the story of the article to fit it.
2. In what way was the mystery "thrown out"? I'm fine with you thinking that, but I'm not sure what mystery you were specifically thinking about.
Usually when I see contradictions in articles, I think, "Wow that could have been fixed easily" but now I see why people can miss it in posting.