Okay, took a quick look at this. General note, please make sure that you have a line space between each paragraph, and that the containment and description text follow immediately after the bolded heading, not on the line below. Take a look at other articles that use the standard formatting to see what I mean.
did you spot anything that would improve the article if flat out removed?
Honestly, for something as meta-y as this, I feel like you can do away with a fair bit of the clinical tone. Sentences like "Its insidious action on the human mind is terrifying to me." seems kind of… disingenuous? I'm guessing this is the writing of a relatively modern-era scientist, so the "confession" sentences feel overly stuffy at times, especially when there's still some casual language in there.
Can you think of some straightforward shortening techniques I'm clearly clueless about?
Think of each sentence separately to start with. Break down to the core information needed, and re-organize phrases if necessary. For example, "Any information about SCP-xxxx is to be withheld from anyone except members of the SCP-xxxx research group: 0/xxxx clearance and any other Foundation-issued clearance are mutually exclusive." can be rephrased as "Information on SCP-XXXX is restricted to the SCP-XXXX research group, regardless of clearance."
Or do you simply not share my belief that it needs to be shortened?
I'm a fan of short and snappy works, so I can pretty much always trim stuff down.
Is there a glaring in-universe flaw with the containment strategies?
Not sure if this is containment, but why is only one person writing the article? (Is there only one person writing the article?)
"c.f. experiment log #1 for an overview of statements that appear to qualify as significant information" do you also think it's necessary?
Ehh… I would provide maybe a short bullet-point list with some short examples, not a full log. The amount of information attained/explained to the audience doesn't necessitate an entire experiment log for understanding.
Out of curiosity, is there a reason you have the "induce increasingly hostile behaviour in all subjects" effect as well? It's kind of an overused formula addition ("makes you crazy/angry/violent") and doesn't quite seem necessary. Also, did you happen to have the core concept reviewed first? I feel like I'm not quite getting what's happening here. It's an object that when described, causes people to become excessively and often unrelatedly honest? And there's no way to prevent that? And that's it?