SCP Foundation

1. The gif takes up too much attention. The image itself is way too big, and the ends of some of the lines touched the image. This made reading the containment procedures really difficult. Make it smaller and separate the text better if possible.

2.

SCP-4929 is a semi-sentient trapezoidal piggy-bank

I recently received the critique that the descriptions of skips can only describe what is actually being seen. Sentience cannot be seen, and therefore should not be mentioned here. The sentience of the object is well implied by the blinking and the test log.

3.

the mouth being slightly larger than a none anomalous 'Face Bank' of the same mold

This is kind of a late and non sequitur place to mention the item's brand name, and didn't feel very clinical. Why not call it a face bank in the first sentence so that there's is more context here, or better yet cut out this somewhat unnecessary detail (it didn't really seem to serve the greater narrative of the object at all). If you are keeping the sentence, make sure to change "none anomalous" to "non-anomalous"

4. Speaking of typos, this thing is FULL of them. I'm not gonna point out every single one, but I just want you to make sure you really give this a full read before posting to the main site. Just as an example, besides the one above, you forgot an asterisk on the bolding of the containment procedures, and it now says "*Special Containment Procedures**." Again, there are tons of these mistakes. Find them and fix them.

5.

SCP-4929 has also shown to react to personnel who have made contact with its eye, as it responds via a singular blink in the eye physical contact was made to.

This sentence is very clunky, and "eye contact" does not equal "physical eye-to-eye contact." The word "physical" here ends up implying the eyes literally touching eachother. I would rephrase this sentence as, "SCP-4929 also appears capable of "blinking" when made eye contact with," or something along these lines.

6.

Money retrieved via SCP-4929's holding slot is void of raised print, including Braille, and is deemed unusable and seen as counterfeit.

The end of this sentence is a major drop in clinical tone. The phrases "deemed" and "seen as" are very opinion-based. Replace this sentence by just saying "upon close inspection, the money is not legal tender." This sort of sentence is based purely on facts.

7. Your discovery section is boring. Not every skip needs a discovery section, so if you can't think of a more interesting story, just scrap it entirely. However, what you have there is certainly the start of a good story. I like the idea that someone used this thing to cheat at a casino. Expand upon it.

8.

At this point, SCP-4929 had suddenly discontinued its motions, appearing to have noticed the dissection. SCP-4929 stopped the regular motion of its mouth for approximately 16 minutes, presumably anticipating the placement of one of the doctor's fingers to be placed by the gears responsible for moving its mouth.

This goes right next to the "semi sentient" thing: Don't tell me what this thing thinks. Tell me what it does. The reader is perfectly capable of inferring this thing's ability to defend itself.

9.

thirteen times (13x)

This was unnecessary, and also conflicts with your lack of number (#) formatting of "16 minutes" earlier in the same paragraph. I'm pretty sure having both of these appear just as written numbers.

It looks like you've already received feedback on this article here: http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-9787774/a-financially-ruining-scp

and you have not yet edited the page to address the feedback yet. Personally, I recommend getting the base idea polished up in the Ideas and Brainstorming forum before you try fixing the draft. Go to that forum, post a quick summary of the concept you want to write up (don't link the draft unless someone asks), and reviewers there can help you make the idea more interesting and give you some advice on structuring the eventual article for smoothness of reading and narrative.

Also, make it clear whether you have the image rights/permissions to use the .gif in the article (which admittedly might be better off removed, since not only will it be unnecessary strain on readers using mobile devices with limited data plans, it also doesn't really need to be animated. A still image of the object would have been fine for this sort of documentation).

Currently, you have a lot of overly detailed sentences (particularly in the description) that come off a bit as run-ons. Additionally, the first paragraph sentences have too much material stuffed in that can make it difficult for a reader to go through them smoothly, especially since the actual primary anomaly isn't even described until the second paragraph.

The expungments are also done incorrectly; you don't need expunged data for something that a blackbox or a [REDACTED] would cover. Typically unless there's a good paragraph of information that's just been purged entirely, or something extremely sensitive information-wise, there's no need to use the expungment. Also, the number (#) numeration is used for extreme precision measurements that can be fatal if misinterpreted, like drug prescriptions. Alternatively, it's for legal reasons to avoid ambiguity. You don't need to do that with easy to count whole numbers. Both of these issues can be addressed in the ideas stage where you figure out which parts of the anomaly's mechanics (i.e., how the anomaly works) and backstory are interesting and the audience likes, and which stuff is more fluff text that can be trimmed out (currently, the backstory isn't particularly interesting, and the article would probably be better off if that addendum was just removed).