There are some cases where pieces of the Special Containment Procedures are redacted, but these are rare and must be executed perfectly. 110-Montauk is expunged from the procedures, even though it's vital in preventing an XK-Class Event, but the document makes it clear that the information is still available to containment personnel, and containment personnel only. There must be an extremely good reason to expunge information like this, which is not apparent in this article.
While it can be done, never assume that your article has the necessary material to support a containment redaction.
EDIT: This was supposed to be a new post rather than a reply. Oops.
Okay, you broke the no censorship in the Special Containment Procedures rule. Don't do that.
The first part of that interview was irrelevant approximately, uh… let's see… 4 lines before you said it was.
How did it make a machine copy of itself? Are you saying it made a metal book that it just gave its powers to?
I don't see why you bother telling us it made a few machines during a containment breach, said some quote and; well, that's it. It does nothing for the article. Please explain.
A small aside.
We don't expunge in the containment procedures not because there's a rule against it , but because in virtually every case, doing it is fucking stupid.
To clarify, in-universe the purpose of the Special Containment Procedures section is to serve as emergency instructions for containment or response teams in case of a major event such as a catastrophic breach. It doesn't make sense to censor most things because censoring emergency information needed to save lives and protect Foundation assets is patently retarded; if it were sensitive enough that it should be censored, it wouldn't be in the Procedures section.
Typically, the only information that is acceptable for Procedures-level censorship is the name of the site you're in; if you need this information you already know where you are. Anything else, such as names, should not be censored.
That said, having names (even O5 numbers) in the Procedures is retarded in its own way. Overseers are way too busy to babysit specific SCPs and field their requests; it's like having to ask the CEO of a major global corporation every time you need to get into a filing cabinet. Even a non-Overseer name is silly because a) it violates the nameless, faceless nature of the Foundation and breaks tone, and b) if that person gets sick or killed or otherwise is incapacitated, you're fucked if something bad happens. It just doesn't make sense.