SCP Foundation

• Your clinical tone seems a little weak in places. I'll show you a few instances of this in the specifics, but in the meantime, check out these awesome and helpful articles on tone:
  • How-To-Write-an-SCP
  • Clinical Tone Declassified
• Your draft falls into some of the old cliches. Now, cliche isn't always a bad thing, but it has to be used properly. Check out this helpful article for more information on the pitfalls of cliche:
  • Mackenzie Pitfalls
  • And don't worry, I won't leave you guessing.
• There are some unnecessary redactions in your draft that don't really help your story. Check out this helpful video on the topic:
  • Are Redactions Ridiculous? by Doctor Cimmerian (YouTube)
• Parenthetical enumeration [eg: ‘one (1)’] is not necessary.
• Keep your descriptions concise to avoid confusion or, even worse, reader fatigue.

CONCEPT:

• I'll be blunt here — what you have, so far, is a Cursed Magic Item that operates similarly to the Green Lantern's ring. However, it's at least an interesting cursed magic item.
• This object, for as dangerous as it is, can be locked away without hazard of it breaching containment. As such, you have a Safe object.
  • Thaumiel-class objects are used in the containment of other skips.
• The method of testing is too dangerous to just throw unmentionable numbers of D-Class at it. Check out this helpful video by Doctor Cimmerian on the topic:
  • You're Wrong About D-Class
• Finally, your redactions in what should be the Discovery: header are not as clever as one would hope. You're obviously referring to the Roswell Incident in 1947. Unredacting that section will help your story balance out.

Given the length and wordiness of this article, I'll only be picking out the first or first few instance(s) of an issue.

SPECIFICS:

• "Warning! … Those who are found to have accessed these files without Level 4 clearance … shall be terminated on site."
  • Firstly, it's ‘on sight’.
  • Secondly, this is something that just isn't done anymore. Refer, again, to Mackenzie Pitfalls for a solid explanation.
• "… a non-biological SCP containment tank …" <— If you used ‘SPC’, I'd be able to make a joke here. However, the term ‘SCP’ refers to the document itself, not the object. Sure, we say ‘skips’ as a way, out of universe, to talk about these things, but in universe, not so much. Try something like, "… a standard non-biological Secure Containment Tank at Site-nn …"
• "7 m³" <— You don't need a space between the number and the unit of measure.
• "An observation deck should be …" <— ‘Should be’ is a suggestion. These are orders not guidelines.
• "No one, without permission from a level 4 researcher, is allowed to directly touch XXXX …" <— Try, "Personnel below level-4 must obtain written permission from level-4 or higher personnel …"
• "memetic" <— This is not how memetic hazards work. Check out Understanding Memetics by Sorts for more information.
  • What you're actually looking for here is a tactile cognitohazard.
• "It emits a bright, amber light, at around 3200lm." <— A couple things here:
  • "SCP-XXXX emits amber-colored light …"
  • ‘3,200lm’ <— Fairly easy mistake, but one that trips a lot of people up. The metric standard of measurement for light is ‘lux’.
• "… and even generate temporary black holes …" <— And here is where you lost my interest. If a black hole is generated, no matter how small or temporary it is, it will erase a chunk of the planet.

Direct advice here — scrape away all of the unnecessary details in your draft and bring it down to only the barest of factual essentials. At its core, what is it? After that, cut it in half. What are things your draft can do without? After that, start adding details back onto it slowly, piece by piece rebuilding it into something that's not so overpowered.