This statement is about the ongoing issue centered around SCP-268-J and the 3-month long bans that were issued on 21 July, 2025 for vote manipulation. We are aware of the ongoing conversations surrounding these bans, and are actively working with Administrators from CN and the INT teams to address these concerns for all parties.

We first wish to clarify that the bans were issued based on how we evaluate vote manipulation and brigading. A user's branch of origin was not considered in this assessment. The next sections will walk through the rules, clarify items of confusion, and address what the next steps will be.

The rule for brigading on the EN wiki is as follows:

Brigading: Calling for group downvoting (or group upvoting) of an article is prohibited. Being part of a vote brigade may lead to a ban.
Note: Not every call to check out an article by someone who dislikes it is brigading. Context and intent will determine whether or not an incident is considered brigading.

When we were made aware of the ongoing vote manipulation taking place on SCP-268-J, we conducted an investigation regarding the voting patterns of the users who voted on the EN article. We determined that the sudden influx of votes was related to the translation on CN, as based on users' activity between the two sites.

For each user who we suspected had engaged in vote manipulation, we examined their activity levels on the EN wiki, in comparison with their activity levels on their home branch. Several users had been found to rarely vote on EN works in any capacity, either participating sparsely on our Wiki or having been largely inactive prior. As these users were frequently participating in discussions and voting on the same branch, it became clear to the Disciplinary Team that the sudden influx of new votes was a direct result of coordinated vote brigading.

Of the users who were initially identified, there were a number of users from CN who were not banned for their voting, because they were either a member of the EN community, or frequently voted or engaged on the EN wiki. The bans were issued to users who did not actively participate in the EN wiki, and had only voted on this article as a part of a larger group of votes.

The Disciplinary Team would like to apologize for its lack of transparency surrounding the rationale behind these bans. Nonetheless, the actions taken by particular users of CN were still in violation of our defined rules on vote manipulation. In the past, the Disciplinary Team's lack of proper enforcement regarding this rule has lead to several incidents, leading to larger conflicts; as a result, we now uniformly apply the rules we have at present, to try and address when we identify a pattern of vote manipulation.

We also understand that there has been a lot of confusion surrounding this issue, especially from users originating from foreign branches concerned about being banned for voting on the EN wiki. As such, we are actively communicating with the CN Wiki and are hoping to alleviate their userbase's concerns, while simultaneously clarifying our branch's position and policies. We are working with INT as well, to create a unified understanding between all branches. We hope that, through communication, we will be able to prevent any similar situations from happening in the future.

Appeals for the bans related to SCP-268-J are still being accepted, and will be processed impartially; the bans will not be modified without an appeal. We have not changed the process regarding bans or appeals.

For the previous bans, additional details will be provided in each thread, and any future bans related to this ongoing situation will take place within a centralized thread. To ensure that we are communicating our rationale clearly, we will be providing more specifics for bans issued, providing additional clarification on the specific rules being broken.

The Disciplinary team would like to take a moment to apologize for failing to properly communicate ban reasons and the rationale applied in the situation, leading to an unclear enforcement of the rules. We are actively working to correct this failure in communication, by adding additional context to existing bans, and clarifying how we apply rules between branches. Our hope is that any confusions or misunderstandings will be clarified.

On behalf of the Disciplinary team, we appreciate you reading this. We will continue to update the community as discussions take place.

I’m glad that the INT sites are being listened to and taken seriously. I don’t think this is the right way to log that discussion. We’ve got a disused grand crosslinking forum section, maybe we archive that and make one for Ambassadors and international affairs?

That being said, even if this did fall under our purview, no rules have been broken as far as I can see. Their behaviour could be considered, at worst, mildly petty, maybe a little rude. Which IMO is an understandable reaction after somebody goes on a downvote spree of your articles, regardless of the reason for doing so.

Woedenaz

djkaktus

djkaktus

Woedenaz

1- Specific users mainly on the french wiki downvote a lot of kaktus's works for having ACS formatting.

2- Kaktus comes to the french wiki's discord to make his concerns known in a manner the FR wiki deemed unacceptable for their community standards (thus the complaint), and also goes to the fan-discord to name and shame said french wiki users.

3- Woedenaz contacts at least one french wiki member in private about their downvotes. Several EN members are shown to be (alleged) mocking or insulting in SCP Declassified regarding the french wiki members in question.

Given that this is on the FR branch and the SCP Declassified fan discord, I am under the impression these are not within the juristiction of disciplinary matters (excepting harassment cases of which this is not explicitly reported as one, and thus not investigated as such). Both the FR branch and the SCPD discord may discipline as they deem fit to manage their own communities.

Regardless, I am entirely open to suggestions of possible actions. This post was entirely for posterity and to provide greater context of these users behaviors in the future and to respect our sister sites regarding their concerns of our membership and community.

(Edit to clarify: This is a general incident report and thus IMHO all members of staff may comment or advocate for actions as fits their judgements. Note a related discussion here is contextually related but will be discussed on itself.

(Edit: The following users with non-obvious names have been clarified thanks to Modulum's assistance:

moldy artist is pastarasta1 does not match any existing user name, cadaver industrial is CadaverCommander, spy flupjuck is Henzoid. Let me know if there are other unknown usernames there.

The Translation Block has been updated at the behest of its developer, Resure, as per the instructions on the page linked above.

If articles posted by INT reach the EN thresholds for tag approval, we can create them on this side too.

Provisionally, "international" is approved for tagging them. The language specific information is already in the title, so I don't think we need language specific tags at this point. (And most of them only have 1 or 2 for now)

Are you fine with the pace of 2 articles per day? For me as the one who posted the articles so far, it is ok.

Regarding the tags, just tell me which tags they shall have and which not and I make sure that future postings accord to your wishes. It has been proposed to give all of them a certain "int" or "scp-int" or "international" tag, which I think would be preferable.

I've noticed a bunch of articles have tags which don't exist in EN's tag system. Currently, tags need to be approved, and meet minimum requirements in order to be indexed on EN.

I've brought this up to LadyKatie, and we'll work together to find a solution to this, but we may be removing non-EN tags from INT Hub articles in the near future, as a heads up.

… just kidding, I got it.

Here is a timeline when what article is to be posted (yet awaiting some branches input).
The first are SCP-521-KO, SCP-1092-RU and the Hub itself

With the fixed dates when what is posted, reviewing should be a lot easier. It would be sufficient if two native speakers with some experience in formulating SCPs would check one article each day. Wouldn't even have to be the same each day. I hope we can make such arrangements.
Until then I just ask that someone volunteers to check the above mentioned three articles for spelling, grammar and basic expression and that the other articles in the list find someone willing to check them (SCP-1092-RU is a language based meta SCP with some instructions in the code). The more the merrier.

I myself would post in the morning CET, which is night in America, so most American users won't find that interfering with their posting times.
We also have several staff members who would be willing to post, and most of the active INT staff members are from Europe so even if one would post in the afternoon CET it would still be morning in America (most of your users are from America, right?).

We indeed should make an announcement and post in the Hub's comments at what times of day new INT articles are to be expected.

I think in that light it would be good to prepare a list when which article is going to be posted, so those who want to help us with spelling and grammar know in which order they should check the articles.

If there is an administrative sock account in charge of posting, it could be in the hands of a couple people - in case dropping by daily to post articles is unfeasibke for a single person.

Hell, do it as a daily thing, and we make a thing of it: Having the month of November be an impromtu celebration of our sister branches.

Edit: and agreeing with Zyn that we should have this announced on the mainsite with whatever schedule is decided upon.