Reports 5


The information here is not up-to-date and may be inaccurate.

It is preserved for historical purposes. Please avoid editing this page.


Reserve Staff (TroyLTroyL, 7 Jan 2014)

This is the first written report for Reserve Staff. To write a report, simply create a new page using the new page template at the top of this tabbed document. All pages created using that tool will be logged here and kept.


If You Need Extra Help… (TroyLTroyL, 18 Jan 2014)

….make sure you contact Dexanote or myself, at the very least. We're going to be trying to keep a good gauge on who has time to do things, but we've got no idea what's going on unless you keep us updated on your current projects.



Rewrite Team (TroyLTroyL, 7 Jan 2014)

This is the first written report for the Rewrite Team. To write a report, simply create a new page using the new page template at the top of this tabbed document. All pages created using that tool will be logged here and kept.


SCP-475 is at +2 and may need a rewrite. (DrClefDrClef, 10 Jan 2014)*

It's at +2 and may need a rewrite

- Coincidentally, I was planning an Origins run about it, noticed it was low, and PMed the author asking permission to rewrite it.
- Rewrite is complete. Will keep an eye on it and see what the score turns into. Currently stable at +5.

SCP-491 is at -8 and in danger of deletion (DrClefDrClef, 12 Jan 2014)*

The guy who did a rewrite on this one and had it reverted got permission from Sal, so if he hasn't added it back up we could re-revert it to the rewritten version, which iirc was much better, language-wise.

Reimann has permission from Sal and took screenshots of the old article. Deleting it and allowing him to post anew.

SCP-491 has been rewritten, this issue is resolved

SCP-814 is at -4 and in danger of deletion. (DrClefDrClef, 12 Jan 2014)*

I have a rewrite of this one up currently, so I think we can shop it around to others. If Cryogen is on tonight we can do what we did for pope on a rope, just discuss the article as it is and how it could be improved.

Update: An official call for rewrite is up in the thread, complete with suggestions for fixing the description length, awkward wording, and Class of 76 link.

Update: Mr Carbon has agreed to do a rewrite of SCP-814. He is going to get back to us with his first draft on Sunday.

Update: SCP-814 has been successfully rewritten.

Officially Recognizing SCP Classic (RogetRoget, 12 Jan 2014)*

I think it's about time we recognized SCP Classic as an official spinoff site, especially since the guy gave Clef owner and such. It's such a great project for one guy to have done, I think the least we could do is link to it.

Troy: This sounds like a great idea, actually.
Clef: Wait, I'm owner? When did this happen?

awhile ago — Roget

SCP-150 (RogetRoget, 12 Jan 2014)

Is extremely short, and sort of boring. TheRaven has given me permission to expand it and make it more interesting, so I believe that, since it isn't in danger of imminent deletion, we should use our new method of long review posts designed to try and solicit as much feedback as possible, as detailed in one of the tabs on the main page. If anyone on the team wants to do the rewrite, please see me. - Roget


SCP-181 (RogetRoget, 13 Jan 2014)

Guy named SoultearSoultear wishes to rewrite SCP-181. Since he's been on the site for a day, I decided to let him write up a draft so we can see if he's got the chops to do this for reals.

SCP-664 (RogetRoget, 27 Jan 2014)

Please place SCP-664 up for a call to rewrite under the new system, if we have not done so already. Have my instructions to begin doing the announcement/review/what-have-you stuff been carried out yet, or is it being delayed?

e: Also he edited his article as recently as January of last year, so definitely take the effort to reach out and PM the guy.

SCP-1681 (CryogenChaosCryogenChaos, 1 Feb 2014)*

InfernalMaelstromInfernalMaelstrom has requested to rewrite currently failing article SCP-1681 (originally by Dr HamiltonDr Hamilton). I gave him the standard spiel and let him go at it, he's got until Monday to submit his draft.

Link to a screencap of the original article:

EDIT: InfernalMaelstrom informed me he has an exam on Monday and needed this weekend to study. I've extended the deadline to Friday for his draft.

EDIT: I've added a timer to the page for Friday to keep people from freaking out about a -83 and dropping article remaining undeleted and to give us an official deadline.

EDIT: InfernalMaelstrom sent me his rewrite here, under "1681 Rewrite".

SCP-166 (DrClefDrClef, 4 Feb 2014)*

I am putting SCP-166 up for rewrite. It's still positively rated, but I think we can do better than this with the themes we've got.

I'll put a detailed review of this up on the article's discussion page and I've been given permission by Roget begin the rewrite process. Naturally I'm going to seek Clef's input/blessing/collaboration on this~Vivax

Any word on this? ~Clef

Some Low rateds we could take care of (RogetRoget, 6 Feb 2014)*

SCP-1974 (Rating: -6, Comments: 24)
SCP-563 (Rating: -5, Comments: 22)
SCP-664 (Rating: -4, Comments: 33)

Xiao is the author of 1974, he might be persuaded to hop on the saddle and mess with it.

664, we could shop around. I haven't read it in awhile but it shouldn't be too hard.

UPDATE: Anaxagoras has volunteered to rewrite 664. I've sent him the PM, he'll get back to us by Monday hopefully.

UPDATE: Anaxagoras has relinquished rewrite responsibility of 664, and we have reassigned it to Musuko; PM sent.

Drewbear was concerned about 563, which is the article that got him on the wiki.

UPDATE: Drewbear said he would do a rewrite of 563. Hopefully we'll be able to get it patched up by Sunday or Monday.

Update: The 563 rewrite is live. I'm having some issues with the pics, but that may be because I'm on my work computer. I have a temporary workaround in place and will fix it for good once I get home. — Drewbear

Hopefully this trio will be the last we have to do these band-aid negative rating hail-mary rewrites for. With the list being finished, we can finally begin the actual review process. — Roget

SCP-179, SCP-360 and SCP-255 (CryogenChaosCryogenChaos, 12 Mar 2014)*

Well holy shit, apparently these three articles just silently slid under our radars.

SCP-255, currently at -4, an abandoned article that shouldn't be too hard to find a rewriter/updater for.

EDIT: Put it up for review, we'll see how that goes.

SCP-360, currently at -12, under the jurisdiction of Roget (Roget, when you see this please let us know what your plans are for this article).

EDIT: Welp, that's gone, and Aelanna's new article is there. Guess that's that.

SCP-179, currently at -12, under the jurisdiction of Heiden. I've contacted Heiden so hopefully we'll get this one resolved quickly.

EDIT: Heiden has given the article to the Rewrite team, and Montala wants to do a rewrite. I'm grantin' him the rewrite, sending him the standard spiel.

EDIT: So it's been a bit since Montala agreed to do the rewrite, and I haven't heard from him in awhile. I'm giving him two more days to give us an update, otherwise Reject is going to be given the rewrite.

EDIT: I've given the rewrite to Reject, who said he'll have it done by the 14th (a bit longer than our usual window, but I trust Reject). I want it made clear to everyone (as I told Roget and Reject) that this is the last time we pass off this article for a rewrite. If Reject doesn't get the rewrite done, the article will be deleted.

So yeah, these three need to be taken care of as soon as possible.

EDIT: It's been more than 2 weeks and both 179 & 255 are still unchanged and past the deletion threshold. Something needs to happen this week, either a rewrite posted, or a full-on deletion. -Drewbear

I already started the vote on 179 - Roget

Edit: I've started the vote on 255. —Drewbear, 4/8/14

Rewrite Process Proposal by Mulciber (CryogenChaosCryogenChaos, 4 Apr 2014)*

Mulciber sent me a PM outlining an idea he had for the rewrite process that both myself and weizhong thought was at least interesting, posting it here for consideration and discussion.

Just had an idea for rewrites I thought I would share. When an article is flagged for attention and a rewrite is proposed, do you often get more than one individual asking to perform said rewrite?
I thought it might be interesting to make rewrites into more of a competition, since those seem to garner a great deal of interest. If two or more folks are interested in rewriting an article, you could have them submit their rewrites anonymously and have the highest voted submission "win" the spot; similar to what was done with the 2000 contest but on a smaller, more regular scale. I think anonymity would be an interesting new twist as well. Voting based on content alone makes revealing the winner a bit more of an entertaining spectacle. It would also allow for wild, amusing speculation as to who wrote which proposed version.

Essentially a rewrite "mini contest" for articles with more than one volunteer. I could get behind that idea, since it could easily increase individual interest in rewrites by framing them as rewards instead of chores. Thoughts?

I think people would get too burned out on heavily promoted contests, which'd be a nightmare to administrate and keep relevant or interesting, but if we did it so whichever draft impressed the review staff the most could go, possibly with others being posted if the first one fails. But whole-blown contests are something I can't really get behind, at least not unless you can powerfully rebut "people getting sick of contests all the time". - Roget

Oh goodness no, a full blown contest for each rewrite would be unmanageable. But framing it in such a way where it's not a "contest" so much as a "write-off". You know, "These two/three/four writers want to rewrite the same article. But only one rewrite will be posted, while the others are put on the chopping block trash bin. It's write or flight here on Rewrite Champions!". A sort of "ongoing challenge" deal, I suppose. I admit this might also be difficult to manage, but I think it'd be fun as well. - CryogenChaos

Request to edit tale - Another Boring Day (ZynZyn, 15 Apr 2014)*

User Monocular Milkman recently contacted me in regards to get permission to edit a tale that's currently sitting at +10. I told them to contact Roget and have a proposed draft ready.

They've also made a post on the discussion page here:

EDIT: Gave them the edit opportunity. -CC

Request to edit SCP-122 (ZynZyn, 17 May 2014)

User legendaryweredragon recently made a post in the "Are you a bad enough dude to rescue the SCP?" forum thread, after his post in SCP-122's discussion thread went unnoticed (I think it's this one:

The rewrite request forum post can be found here:

To note, SCP-122 is currently at +63 and the user in question does not have any successful work on the wiki up yet. I've told them to contact the members of the Rewrite Team.

Anomalous Object/Extranormal Event Log Pruning (CryogenChaosCryogenChaos, 30 May 2014)*

So ProcyonLotor brought this up on the Site Crit page, and this falls under our jurisdiction, so here's the skinny:

Talking in staff chat, general consensus is the Collab Logs are incredibly bloated with low-quality content.
Of these, I'd say that Anomalous Objects and Extranormal Events are the areas of main concern (Bright's List, the only one of comparable size, is locked, last I checked).
This will have to be organized, obviously, but I felt it was a good idea to make a post, as similar suggestions have been agreed on and then forgotten about in the past.
I've made two separate sandboxes, one for each, where adjustments can be made once we set up a system.
Anomalous Objects
Extranormal Events

Edit- Log Of Anomalous Items is done.
Edit 2 - EE Log also done

1152 (AnboroughAnborough, 29 Jun 2014)

SCP-1152 has been brought up for rewrite; it's currently at -2.

1152 deleted; new article in its place.

Rewrite Guide and Policy Changes (djkaktusdjkaktus, 11 Sep 2014)

The Rewrite Guide has been posted with assistance from pretty much everyone.

A number of policy changes have been enacted, as well. For more information on the changes in policy, refer to the guide. Most of the changes are designed to streamline the process and make it the same between Series 1, 2, and 3 articles, so there's not a different procedure with all of them.

If you've got any questions or need clarification about the new policy, talk to either Troy or Cryo.

Tagging Things and the Heritage List (weizhongweizhong, 24 Nov 2014)

So Crayne has asked us to start tagging official Rewrite Team sponsored rewrites, aka no "I'm letting this guy rewrite this article for me, k thx" with the tag of "in-rewrite" to make it easier for keeping track of what needs to be deleted and what doesn't.

Also, we're getting asked to revamp the heritage list by the admins. Currently speaking, we have no official plan set in place for what we're doing, so we're open to all suggestions of what to do. This isn't limited to staff by the way, all ideas are welcome from anybody.


RE: The first paragraph. Cool. That makes stuff simpler.

I think that the second paragraph deserves a thread on the forum, as it's it's a minor BFD. What do they mean by "revamp," though? That's a word that can mean a lot of different things, particularly in this context.


Re: Heritage List

Yeah, I'd like some more clarification on what exactly you mean here. Also, try to get a hold of Clef. He was point man on it last time, although I don't know if he wants to do so again.


All that I'm aware of is that the Heritage list is currently considered flawed. Now, I haven't received any word about why exactly it is flawed, so that would be some nice info to get.

New Organizational Threads (Modern_ErasmusModern_Erasmus, 19 Nov 2018)

Ongoing rewrite requests and attempt records will be logged in this thread, as well as the results.

Collaboration log prunings will be run out of this thread, which also contains a record of the logs we curate.

- Erasmus

Site Criticism

Site Criticism (TroyLTroyL, 7 Jan 2014)

This is the first written report for the Site Criticism Team. To write a report, simply create a new page using the new page template at the top of this tabbed document. All pages created using that tool will be logged here and kept.


Deletion Votes (Communism will winCommunism will win, 11 Jan 2014)*

I feel that, in order to ensure that every piece gets enough criticism, we should start exercising our ability to vote against deletion in cases where we judge that a piece hasn't gotten enough critical attention and/or this team hasn't sent someone in to provide staff critique.

Any questions/comments/concerns, edit them in.

(from Eric H.) An idea: Deletion votes should be started by a member of the Site Criticism Team, and not started until the page has gotten enough critique. We should decide on what "enough" means. Or: If other Staff are going to start deletion votes, they need to be aware of that standard, and also make sure the article has been reviewed by someone on this Team.

This way, we don't go back and forth, undoing each others deletion votes.

(from TroyL) Just a quick note: I don't like the idea of only the Site Criticism team starting deletion votes, since voting on deletion (and thereby, starting the votes) is considered a universal staff right. I do believe that Eric has the germ of a good idea here, though, and that simple staff courtesy could be extended to things which haven't gotten critical attention. Otherwise, I like Scantron's initiative here.

(from Eric H.) Here's another possibility: Let the voting take place as it does now, but when an article has its 4 deletion votes, check the amount of criticism it has gotten. If it needs more, put off the deletion (maybe put one of those timers on it to keep track) and encourage more comments for a day or two. Maybe we need an "Articles the Criticism team needs to look at" page going here in O5, so we can quickly see what needs review?

(from Scantron) I'm worried that if we let pages get to four deletion votes, a mod that's not on the site criticism team will carry out the deletion before we can get to it. I feel like voting against deletion would accomplish the same thing and be somewhat "safer". I do like the "Articles the Criticism team needs to look at" page idea, though. If we make it, we should put it in a report, so that we'll automatically get notifications when it's updated.

(from Pig_catapult) Pages Needing More Concrit has been created.

Pages Needing More Concrit (Pig_catapultPig_catapult, 12 Jan 2014) is currently at -24 as of my writing, but only has 7 comments and very little in the way of criticism. ~Pig_catapult

Collab Log Pruning (ProcyonLotorProcyonLotor, 30 May 2014)

Talking in staff chat, general consensus is the Collab Logs are incredibly bloated with low-quality content.
Of these, I'd say that Anomalous Objects and Extranormal Events are the areas of main concern (Bright's List, the only one of comparable size, is locked, last I checked).
This will have to be organized, obviously, but I felt it was a good idea to make a post, as similar suggestions have been agreed on and then forgotten about in the past.
I've made two separate sandboxes, one for each, where adjustments can be made once we set up a system.
Anomalous Objects
Extranormal Events

This is Rewrite's Jurisdiction (mea culpa), and has been passed over to Cryo.

Rewrite Requests Thread (DecibellesDecibelles, 25 Nov 2015)

As a reminder, if someone wishes to rewrite an article, post in this thread. Put the SCP in the title, and state who originally wrote it and who wishes to rewrite, and what deadline (if any) is there. If you're handling the rewrite process, please make sure to post it in the thread, and report to me (or even reply to your post in the thread) with any significant updates (such as deadline changes, if the rewrite is being abandoned, if it's ready to go, etc.). The thread has been there for a while, but I'd like to use it to help keep better track of rewrites so they don't linger for ages. Thank you all! <3

~ Decibelle


Technical Staff (TroyLTroyL, 7 Jan 2014)

This is the first written report for Technical Staff. To write a report, simply create a new page using the new page template at the top of this tabbed document. All pages created using that tool will be logged here and kept.


Greasemonkey userscripts (CrayneCrayne, 17 Jan 2014)*

As requested by TroyL, two Greasemonkey scripts. Both are up for scrutiny and testing.

1. Jumpbox - adds a small textbox and a button next to your account information in the top right of the screen. It allows you to instantly jump to any article you want. Typing in only numbers will shoot you off to the relevant scip. Typing in a mix of letters and numbers, or only letters, will get you that page. So 'chat guide' will get the chat guide. Note that Wikidot takes care of the spaces in there, converting them to dashes.

Preface a title with [modifier]| to get a specific type of article. It makes sure that when you type 827 and want the tale by A Fat Ghost, you don't get SCP-827. Alternatively, typing out the entire pagename will do the trick too. I.e. both j|2006 and SCP-2006-J should get you SCP-2006-J.

  • j: for Joke articles (included a special fix for SCP-J)
  • x: for -EX articles
  • a: for -ARC articles
  • d: for -D articles
  • h: for hub pages (i.e. typing in h|unfounded should get you the Unfounded Canon hub page.
  • t: for tales

If you use any other modifier, it ignores it and acts like you only requested the page you specified after the pipe. I.e. typing o|chat guide will get you the chat guide, ignoring the unknown modifier.

Both an ENTER keypress and a click on the button work to submit.

Note: it doesn't check whether or not the page exists and it doesn't provide anything in the way of spelling correction. I didn't think that would add much when contrasted with the extra work/page load. Also, appearance can of course be pimped/tweaked/tuned and such.

2. Previous and Next buttons - Provides "« Previous" and "Next »" links at the top of any mainlist SCP article. Uses the already existing (and currently unused) action-area-top div, adding a bit of margin at the bottom to make sure it doesn't interfere with the page title. Works fairly fast, but does get slower when there's a lot of [ACCESS DENIED]s between the current page and the next eligible article. This is really only a factor in Series 3 at this moment. I tried to minimize the ajax calls to lighten the load on poor old Wikidot.

3. PM Shortcuts - Adds a small envelope image to the right of usernames produced with the Wikidot [[user XXXX]] and [[*user XXXX]] syntax. Click on the envelope to go directly to a new Wikidot PM addressed to that user. Image is contained within the script in base64 to avoid having to upload it somewhere.

4. Author karma - Replaces the karma bar with one that tells you how many pages the user has written for the site. This pulls info from Nala's Authors by Page Count page. Images are in the script in base64 to avoid having to upload them. Also adds the number and the date Nala's page was updated after the username.

Caveat: Nala's Authors by Page Count page doesn't seem to be updated at a regular interval, so figures may be off. Won't be off by enough to really affect the karma, I suppose. Secondly, Nala doesn't seem to count authors who've only created 1 page.

Karma classification:

# pages #bars
0 0
1-2 1
3-7 2
8-15 3
16-50 4
50+ 5

Nothing's set in stone, so if you have an idea for a better division, let me know.

5. Staff Identification - Adds a line below the username on forum posts to signify if a user is staff. Takes its cue from the Senior Staff list, but leaves out inactive members and chat operators/mods.


  1. Fixed your link, will use it today and let you know what I think. -bluesoul
  2. Uploaded new version of Previous/Next because it derped on -Js etc. - Crayne
  3. Uploaded new version of Previous/Next because I forget to exempt the hub tag - Crayne
  4. Will test it this weekend on Chrome, will let you know if it works. Using Tampermonkey. -Accel
  5. Uploaded new version of Previous/Next. Moved lastSeries variable out of the loop, kept getting overridden and cause problems on the first SCP in a series. - Crayne
  6. Uploaded new version of Jumpbox, malfunctioned when supplying it with input that contained uppercase 'SCP' - Crayne
  7. Uploaded new version of Previous/Next to account for untagged pages (didn't show up there) - Crayne
  8. Adding two more: PM-shortcut and Author-Karma - Crayne
  9. Fixed L4 and L5 karma bars not being rendered for Author-Karma - Crayne
  10. Uploaded new version of Previous/Next to account for pages that haven't been created yet (previous fix for untagged pages meant that while it now did run on created pages without tags, it also ran on non-existent pages) - Crayne
  11. Uploaded new versions of PM Shortcut and Author Karma scripts to make them run after switching to the second page of results on pages like Recent Posts etc. - Crayne
  12. Uploaded new versions of most scripts to comment out console.log calls, added new script Staff Identification - Crayne

Tagging guidelines (CrayneCrayne, 10 Jun 2014)

1. When to tag articles

  • If a page posted less than 24 hours ago has a majority of downvotes: don't bother to tag it.
  • If a page posted less than 24 hours ago has a majority of upvotes: tag it as soon as possible.
  • If a page posted less than 24 hours ago is hovering between -10 and +10: give it 24 hours to see if it sticks around, then tag it.

This will make sure we don't spend valuable time and energy figuring out tags for pages that are gone a day later.

2. Would this tag apply?

Try to imagine a user looking to find articles with that tag. Are they going to be happy if the article you're looking at comes up in the list of results? In other words: does it make sense for it to be in the search results.


a. We have an article about sentient ape-like beings that are able to travel in time, though that's only demonstrated in the final addendum. You'd tag this with temporal, because it's an ability they have and it's relevant if you're looking for scips connected with the 'temporal' tag.

b. The same article, no temporal fuckery, but in the last addendum the interviewed being presents the doctor with an ornately engraved stone carved by one of its artists. You wouldn't tag this with either 'engraved' or 'stone', because this has no bearing on the core concept of the scip. If you were searching for articles tagged with 'stone', this one would probably piss you off if you found it in the results.


Feel free to add questions, or .tell/Wikidot PM with them and I'll answer them below.

Unused Tags (AccelerandoAccelerando, 24 Jun 2014)*

Just noting some tags that I've found either aren't being used or have no official description.

  • saurian - Used in SCP-1378 by Aelanna, removing for now. I won't add reptilian, since she most likely would have added that herself if she wanted to.
  • conversation, epistolary, fable, monologue - All in Drewbear's workshop. Contacting him first in case he was experimenting with something.

Will update if anything else comes up.

I believe those tags had to do with additional tale tags that were being considered. -TroyL

They are indeed for that purpose, those tags in particular were lifted from the Wanderers Library tag system. - Roget

Yeah, they were put in there when I was kinda-sorta exploring new tags for Tales to try to make them easier to search for. I put 'em on my sandbox so the search function on the page would register something. I can take 'em out if need be. — Drewbear

If you're done with them, feel free to remove them. :) -Accel

Before they're removed… Did we ever decide on using them for anything? -TroyL

The conversation on what new tags, if any, to use for Tales kinda petered out without any resolution. I had originally suggested genre tags until it was rightfully pointed out that that's subjective as shit, which left the stylistic suggestions above. I had also suggested "poem", but that was later independently covered by the new "poetry" tag. As far as I know, there's been no final decision on new tags for Tales. — Drewbear

I believe this is Crayne's bailiwick. Thoughts on more specific tags for tales, Crayne? -TroyL

Since no one's answered the comment on the discussion page, why not Zoidberg?

On the subject of tale-specific tags: there's a couple of approaches if you want tales to be tagged in more detail. One would be genres, but as Drewbear pointed out, that's going to be subjective chaos. I could also see a series of tags for common themes like 'romance', 'betrayal', 'character-death', 'violence', 'paranormal' etc. (not saying all these are very good example - this would take a lot of hashing out), so people could find tales that have themes in common.

In addition, series could get their own tags providing they adhere to a few rules (x number of installments, coherent storyline etc.?)

Thoughts? - Crayne

New tags. (weizhongweizhong, 26 Jun 2014)*

So, while people were on the subject of unused tags, I felt that we should also have a space to discuss new tags. One in particular that Crayne and I have discussed before was a tag for butterfly SCPs (i.e "lepidopteran") given that we have quite a few of those. Feel free to post more tag suggestions here. -weizhong

We already have lepidopteran. On a side note, I was thinking of making a tag for Internet SCPs, to go along with Computer, or maybe supersede it. - Accel

We have a lot of limb SCP's, like the buried giant, your leg, friendly graveyard and Hoboken bunion emergency. Suggesting an 'extremity' tag.

I'd like to propose the rewrite tag again. Roget brought it up once or twice in the past, and I think it makes sense to have it now as a method of finding, cataloging, and keeping track of articles that have been rewritten extensively. -TroyL

I'm not so sure about the extremity tag, because it feels weird to have one tag for limbs only and not other body parts. It feels a bit too specific. If Crayne approves, though, I won't argue.

I really like the idea of a rewrite tag. There isn't any reason keeping it from already being a tag, I would gladly start working on finding the articles for this one. -Accel

A. Extremity might be too specific, yes. Broadening the definition to bodypart or something similar would include more articles. We'll need to think about that (and about a better word than bodypart).

B. The rewrite tag. First off, apologies to Roget for not getting back to him sooner. I meant to and then completely forgot. My thoughts:

1. At its core, the tagging system should serve readers, letting them find similarly themed articles. That means tags should describe what an article is about, or in the case of meta tags, what it is. They're permanent unless rewritten, in which case the tags might change. The proposed rewrite tag is, by definition, a temporary status. Someone would need to remove it after enough time has passed, and that creates a manual workload. Roget's rewrite team is willing to do that, but that's not the point. It's making something harder for no really good reason. Which brings me to the next point.

2a. Ostensibly, the new tag would be to increase visibility of rewrites. I personally don't see the point of labeling something as a rewrite so it can gather more attention. A far more efficient way to do this is to ensure it has the same exposure as any other newly posted article: by doing a delete and post, and not just overwrite the existing article. If one simply edits the old page, there's going to be an certain amount of downvotes relating to the older version that will never be revisited; when a new version is posted in its place, it'll get the same deal as new articles. Well, it will be a new article.

2b. If the history of the page needs to be maintained (which I personally question, a rewrite means the old version wasn't up to snuff, why keep it around?), we have multiple options: we could post it on SCP Classic, we could keep screenshots on the page, we could collapse the old version in the comments etc.

3. Even if the Rewrite team maintains the tag conscientiously, at what point does a rewrite stop being a rewrite? It really seems like an arbitrary time period.

Of course, I can see how the rewrite team might benefit from a tag like that, but since it's fundamentally different from how the tagging system works (and IMHO should work), I'm not positive we should do this.

I see what you're getting at, Crayne. I think.

I guess I didn't get all the information on how this tag would work, because I assumed it would remain on an article indefinitely (like featured). A featured article never becomes not featured, so how does an article that's been rewritten become not rewritten? I could see how it would be seen as the normal article and not a rewrite over time, but rewrites happen only every so often; there would likely be periods where we would end up with no articles with the rewrite tag if we removed it from articles after a certain amount of time.

I'm not sure if I would agree with the tag being used as a sort of announcement page for new rewrites, since we already have stuff to do that. I was thinking that this would simply let people know what articles have been changed and have original versions out there. This sort of tag would make the !tags command for the chat bot a bit more helpful for people trying to find things (and should definitely be put on the site itself). -Accel

Could/should we have a tag for something like this page? Something like "system"? My concern is that it is effectively invisible right now, and I don't like invisible pages that no one knows about or can reach. -anqxyr

The use of categories makes tags kind of superfluous there. A warning like Aelanna put on components might be a good idea though. - Crayne

Tag guide edited, tags added (CrayneCrayne, 5 Nov 2014)

- Edited the tag guide to include a new tab: "Staff Process Tags". These signify that an article is in a predetermined process like "rewrite" or "deletion". More tags might be applicable.

- Renamed the "rewrite-in-progress" tag to "in-rewrite". Tag was requested by the rewrite team but does not seem to be used at the moment. Please do use it, or I will remove it again.

- Added the "in-deletion" tag. Goal is to keep better track of articles with deletion votes, so the votes don't get missed.

ListPages code for your workbench, modify for "in-rewrite" of course:

[[module ListPages tags="+in-deletion" order="rating desc" perPage="50" separate="no" prependLine="||~ Title||~ Rating||~ Created||"]]
||%%title_linked%%||%%rating%%||%%created_at%% ||

Edit: this also works:

New timers (CrayneCrayne, 10 Dec 2014)

Replaced Aelanna's timer tool with the new page that's been in test for a while. It can generate three types of timers:

  1. Deletion timers: pages in deletion range are automatically taken from a list on my workbench (but that list can be put on any page). Each page eligible for deletion either shows a link to get the appropriate post content (including a timer if it's an early deletion) or the message that deletion's been started (if the page's been properly tagged with the 'in-deletion' tag)
  2. Ban timers: you have the choice of whether to start from the moment you hit the button at the bottom of the form, or to set a specified start date/time. You can also select a few predefined lengths for the timer, or supply your own. Hitting the button will generate the timer code to include in your page or post, and a preview of said timer.
  3. Generic timers: same as ban, but timer shows a different message.

A Tales Page for the Future (CrayneCrayne, 10 Dec 2014)


So, let's consolidate all those loose ends here. LurkD and djkaktus are working on a revamp of the Tales page, trying to automate its composition and provide multiple ways of accessing the little bastards.

Up till now, as far as I understand it, the biggest problem has been sorting alphabetically by author. This is problematic because it's impossible to pull a ListPages by the first letter of the author's username. The solution would then lie in (preferably hidden) tags. This presents a few problems of its own:

  1. Hidden tags aren't actually hidden, they still show up underneath the page, only not in the tag cloud. Thanks Wikidot. I solved this by introducing a CSS selector to the site theme that detects whether the link for that tag underneath a page starts with "/system:page-tags/tag/_" and then setting "display: none;". This works, the hidden tags are now actually hidden.
  2. The initial work involved. All tales would have to be tagged for the initial run. This is easily automated though.
  3. The on-going work involved. All tales should henceforth be tagged with _[LETTER], where [LETTER] is the first letter of the author's username.

A drawback of automation in general is that we have no way of making sure tales that were either rewritten, or posted by someone for another member, is attributed to the right author. Well, you can always change the tag, but that doesn't really produce what you want it to. For example, I posted 'Freaky Commodities' for Reject, and changing the hidden tag on there from '_c' to '_r' would only move the page to the 'R' page, not suddenly list Reject as the author. This is something we need to accept if we want this to remain an actual Wikidot page.

The other option we have is to generate all 26 pages periodically. The pros of that would be that the script can use the API and also use Alexandra's Rewrite page to make sure tales get listed under the right author. However, that would be a radical departure from what LurkD has been doing.



  1. Has wikidot gotten around to introducing a way to override the page's metadata for its own modules, or is that still a pipedream? -TroyL

*TroyL, my guess is this a ways off. I'll look into this further and hopefully get back to you. -LurkD
* Elaborate? What's the problem exactly? - Crayne

  1. The "Excerpt" part seems like it just takes the first X characters from the tale, which isn't really indicative of anything that the tale is about, and leads to gems like "Project Crossover Dial S For SCP This is an…" being the description. Is there any way to allow the author to modify the excerpt? If not, I think that scrapping that part of this might be in order. - Gaffs
    • As far as I know, this is under construction and would indeed allow authors to write their own blurb. If they don't the first X characters would be shown. Feel free to correct me, Lurk or Troy. -Crayne
    • Gaffs, you can use 0 size font (which is essentially invisible text) to customize a tale blurb. Just put it after the rating module and the system will pick it up. Note, it is still limited by a set number of characters. -LurkD
    • Fair enough. Maybe mention that somewhere in hub page. - Gaffs


Tales Hub

djkaktusdjkaktus Has put together a master hub for the future tales page. Look through it when you have a chance: LINK


djkaktus edit: Ok so I had anqxyr tag everything automatically. Worked like a dream, which is great. LurkD, feel free to finish putting together those modules, in the style of this ( page.

As an aside, I think we should make these component pages instead of full pages, so they won't show up on the recently created list. Maybe have the set be "Foundation-tales-author" and then, for example, have the "A" page be "Foundation-tales-author:A" or something whatever idk you guys are the tech nerds.

Anyway, once we get all 26 pages together, it's go time. I'll roll out the hub, we can get the 7 "foundation-tales-year" pages out, and create a few more for the other stuff and WHAMY. We're done.

Thoughts on this?

Tagging deputies (CrayneCrayne, 11 Feb 2015)

I've been doing this unofficially for a while now, but I want to give members who have demonstrated the ability to correctly tag articles the freedom to do so.

Right now, what I do is I give people who want to tag the opportunity to suggest tags for untagged articles. I run over those tags with them, discussing why a tag is or is not applicable, and if they demonstrate the capability to do so without making mistakes, I don't revert their tagging.

I'll add more people to this list below once there are more people.

DrShy xPIGx

Now, there's people on staff who tag their own articles. That's fine, I trust you guys to select the right ones, but if you hesitate on tagging, please just ask for advice.

Interim Appointment (RogetRoget, 27 Nov 2017)

In my capacity as interim contact Admin for the technical team, I am appointing DrMagnus as the interim captain to be confirmed or changed when a more permanent contact admin is established - roget

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License