Hello fella, glad to have you on here!
As a friend, I can afford to be ruthless in my critique, so there are some things I will pick out that I know will lose you votes. It reads very well, but there's a lot of informalities that have crept in. Keeping the tone as dry and scientific as possible whilst still imbuing the article with the atmosphere necessary to have an effect on the reader is very difficult, and phrases like "A local haunt" are a little too purple prose for SCP articles. Also a lot of people have issues with using quotation marks to put colloqualisms into the text. It's seen as cheating for a lot of people. I don't mind it personally, as long as it's evidential that it is part of a direct quote or interview.
Redacting the place the site staff need to go to is a BIG no-no. This document is designed so that the people resonsible for the containment of the item or event are able to read the containment procedures and quickly re-contain in the event of an SCP getting out of its containment. To not let the people reading it know where they have to go or what they are supposed to use for cleaning would be daft.
The whole thing reads very well, and I know exactly what you're writing about, and I like that idea a lot. Unfortunately writing SCPs is an absolute bloody minefield, and I don't think this one would fly on the main list. I could very well be totally wrong, however. I frequently am, as you well know.