As per the Remove and Counter proposal, 52 pages under the 'Works to Be Deleted and Recycled' have been unlisted, with staff placeholders created for relevant pages.

Discussions on how to handle the remaining 8 pages will continue, and we hope to have the situation fully resolved as soon as we can.

The results for voting on the Bright Works Project Proposal are as follows:

As per the Remove and Counter proposal, staff will now begin to work on defined aspects of the proposal, while we continue with a discussion to determine any ambiguities or specific details about this proposal. A thread will be posted later today, which will run for a week — at the conclusion of this discussion, if there is not consensus on the options provided, the alternatives will be put to a vote.

The resolution will follow the steps outlined in the proposal linked above, and we hope to have this issue resolved as soon as possible. The estimated timeline is approximately one month.

Note: As we continue to determine the specific resolutions or phrasing for any amended statements, we highly encourage any victims of Bright to reach out and get involved in this process. We want to hear your thoughts, so please do not hesitate to speak to myself or another member of staff.

Apologies for the holiday delay, but I am here with an update regarding the Bright Works Project!

During the last update, we were still drafting the four proposals and were not positive on a timeline. Since that time, we have pushed forward with more support from various staff members, and made significant progress! Currently, the four proposals have a finished initial draft, and are now undergoing internal review by relevant staff/team members, meaning that we are essentially in Stage 5.2.

The reason I say 'essentially' is that there is a fifth proposal that is being drafted, and expected to be finished within the next few days! This proposal is significantly more involved than the previous four, and is directly informed by ongoing conversations with victims of Bright; once the draft is finished, we will review it internally alongside the other four.

As a result, and based on the number of people we have actively helping out, it is our current goal to finish Stage 5 this month, and move onto Stage 6, where we will be posting a thread to discuss the five proposals, pointing out any issues/voicing support, etc. This discussion will continue as per the standard two week cycles, with new discussion threads being created as needed — however, if there is a clear consensus or understanding following the first discussion thread, we would be able to move right into voting!

Once voting has finished, we will begin actioning on the Bright Works Issue. We have already generated rough timelines for each proposal's execution, so when chosen, there will be a listed latest date for the effort to be completely resolved! This means that once we have finished the internal staff review, we will have a clear roadmap for how we get from the vote to resolution, finally ending this issue.

I will be updating this thread again on February 9th, 2026 unless we have a discussion thread already posted!

I also wanted to take a quick moment to state the following again: If you are a victim of Bright, and are willing to talk to me about this or want to be involved in some regard, please reach out to me either via Wikidot PM or by Discord PM. We have not reached out, so that nobody feels forced to engage with this topic — but I am always happy to talk!

Thank you all again, and I look forward to our next update!

Apologies for the extended delay, but due to the upcoming holidays, the volunteers working on this effort have been having difficulty finding the time; given that we do not want to make any commitments over the holidays as a result, we are formally announcing that work for this will be paused until the new year.

We will update again when work restarts, and hope to have this resolved promptly!

Thanks so much all, and happy holidays!

The team has continued to work diligently, furthering the drafts of the various assorted proposals. We recent had additional staff members joining the effort, and are currently planning to try and get more collaboration into this effort within staff, so we can get this resolved even sooner. In terms of the work being done, it is much the same.

I hope to have a more definitive update next time, but for now, we remain in stage 5, and will continue to work away until it is completed. I will be back on Monday 10 November 25 with another update!

Just back to check in and let you all know that progress is continuing on drafting the full proposals. We took some time to discuss another potential proposal that was raised, presenting alternative options, and plan to develop that before adding it to the set of proposal drafts. For now, we continue to work on drafting the proposals, while also having discussions regarding the details of each proposal, such that we will be presenting the best possible solutions to you all!

There will be another standard update on 22 September, 2025 — thanks again for hanging in there with us!

I'm back with our major update, and am happy to report that progress is continuing well on Stage 5. We're fleshing out the specific written out proposals for a final presentation, and have made steady progress since the last update.

We'll be continuing to work on Stage 5, pushing through to get to the end here. Thanks so much for sticking with us all, and I'll be back with a standard update on September 8th, 2025!

Without further preamble, I am happy to announce that Staff has completed Stage 4, where we created plans and rough outlines for each proposal that we have identified thus far. We are now moving onto Stage 5, where we will be drafting the proposals in full, and soliciting feedback from any relevant staff teams!

Once the proposals are drafted, then we will be able to review them overall as staff, before we move into the process of choosing the proposal that we will execute. At that point, we will have a full roadmap, detailed steps, and a proposal to act as a guideline for us when we are resolving the notes issues! We are nearly at the end of this process, and we will be resolving this in due time.

Thanks again for reading this update, I will return on August 25th 2025 for another major update, and otherwise, hope to have this resolved in a reasonable timeline!

Here again, and happy to report on forward progress for the proposal plans! At this time, 75% of the plans have been filled out, and in greater detail than we had initially aimed for. As a result, the next stage will go much more smoothly once it begins! Right now, we are working on finalizing the last listed proposal plan, and then touching base with the rest of staff to get everything in, before we move onto the next Stage!

I expect that by the next update, we will be moving onto Stage 5, and getting drafted proposals in front of people sooner rather than later!

Thanks so much for your patience, all, and I will be back on 11 August 2025 with another update!

Welcome to Main Update 6, where, again, it's a lighter update this week. As a team, we have identified a set of proposal plans that we will be focused on developing, rather than staying in blue-sky ideation. Over the next weeks, we will be focused on completing the proposal plans for these collaboratively, and will aim to move onto the next stage by the end of July.

We have had internal conversations about how we can best collaborate moving forwards, and now that we are more directly aligned, I hope that things will pick back up!

Thanks so much for checking in, and I will return with another major update on 28 July 2025!

Again, business continues as usual. Due to promotions and other staff issues, we have had less time to focus on this, but plan to keep moving in the coming weeks. To avoid being stuck in this stage for an unnecessarily long time, we plan to discuss a date from which we will move forward with the proposals that we have, rather than blue-sky ideating forever.

Thanks again for the patience everybody, and the next update will resume proper cadence, on July 14th!

Another smaller update this week, but we have continued work on Stage 4, and have multiple staff members developing proposal plans. We are continuing with this, and plan to develop more detailed proposal plans as time goes on.

Not much to say this time, but look out for the next update on 30 June, 2025!

A smaller update today, as the stages we are now in take much longer, due to the scale of the work. However, I am happy to announce that we have moved onto Stage 4!

In the time since the last update, we identified solutions for each of the given problems, and kept iterating on both the solutions, as well as the issues surrounding these works. We reached a point where we felt like we had a solid scope of issues and solutions, and that any others that may arise during the rest of this process can be added to the page at any time.

In moving into Stage 4, we are now working on creating proposal plans — these are high-level outlines of what we would do to resolve this problem. At the moment, nothing is set in stone; rather, we are identifying potential groupings of solutions that make sense, so we can have a wider range of options to discuss and critique. Staff have been working hard on providing alternative options, so that there is a reasonable breadth of choice for resolution, each one focusing into a different 'niche' of resolution. This stage will have us create a reasonable number of proposal plans, at which point, we will review them as a team, critiquing them and identifying places it doesn't work; our hope is that by addressing any potential issues now, we can set ourselves up for success when it comes time for drafting the proposals in full, such that any votes can be made with a full understanding of the options.

So yeah! We've moved onto the next stage, and are moving along well. Thanks so much for reading, and I will be back with another update on 16 June 2025!

Since last time, we have continued to work on Stage 3, and have undertaken related work, in preparation for Stage 4.

Specifically — we started by identifying all of the specific problems we are facing with Bright's works. This includes the specific issues we are trying to solve, and potential issues that may crop up, which we need to plan for. That work has been completed (we are still adding new issues as we find them, but have a significantly comprehensive list so far), and we moved onto the next part of Stage 3, identifying solutions for each problem.

For each of the issues we identified, we have generated 2-3 potential ways of resolving that problem, documenting said solutions. That aspect of the work is still ongoing, and will be until this is fully resolved (as we may find new solutions as we continue through the process) — however, we have a major set of solutions identified, and have also begun to work on the final aspect of Stage 3.

Now that we have a list of issues, and solutions, we can start to group/organize them, into proposal plans. These are essentially the rough outlines for the proposals that we are planning to draft in full in Stage 4. These proposal plans have the general idea of how we would solve the issues, but have not been reviewed or discussed as a group.

That is where we are today; we are nearing the end of Stage 3, and once we are done, we will have full proposal outlines, meaning that Stages 4 & 5 will go much faster! As we've continued in our effort, we have slightly iterated the process, and doing a bit of work out of order — but it has meant that we are more effective in what we do, and will have less work for us in the later steps.

As a final note, below in the discussion, you might see links to our internal working pages, and I just wanted to give a bit of context with them. The internal planning page was not planned at the level of detail you see now when this thread first went up, and is a living document that we have been continually updating. None of the pages, or the details included on them, mean that whatever they say is a certainty; rather, they are the choices we have made, through this process, as we attempt to balance harm reduction, accountability, and expediency. For convenience, a link to the main working hub is provided below, as an aspect of transparency; these pages are all publicly viewable, and meant to remain for archival purposes. We had not shared them yet, as we were finalizing the background systems to protect the identities of the staff members who are helping in this effort.

All of the relevant information can be found here: Bright Works Hub

We are well on our way through Stage 3, and will be moving into next Stages soon. Thanks so much for reading this, and I will return with another update on June 2nd!

Going forward, there should be zero exceptions on the username policy's clause on names implying rank/authority.

As for changing Bright's attributions I suspect a response on that will come after we've decided what to do with the works. I'm personally really hoping for changing their attributions to no attributions.

Edit: …by which I mean the pages no longer being on the wiki in the same form and there being no metadata. Obviously licensebox info will still have to list the author to comply with CC, even if the pages are unlisted and splashed up the wazoo or whatever.

a[href*="user:info/adminbright"]::before { content: 'Ex-'; } a[href*="user:info/adminbright"]:nth-child(1)::before { content: unset; }

This would be a very simple code change to add a clear indicator that Bright's current username is inaccurate. The fact is that this username still appears on places on the site where it could be seen and misunderstood by users as signifying a position of authority which no longer exists. This is of course the exact reason why such names implying authority are not permitted on our site, and given how widespread Bright's influence as an author and former admin was, it merits a special CSS change to rectify this.

Tech feels that we can and should action this separately from any other action taken towards Bright's articles; errant mentions of Bright's username will appear throughout the site regardless of what actions are taken. (I do not believe that going through the forums to find and delete any forum comments left by Bright is being proposed here, nor would I think that aligns with our typical stance towards deleting forum comments.) We would like to do this as soon as possible.

Additionally, in the previous thread I had also proposed that staff change all formal page attributions from "AdminBright" to "TheDuckman", as this was the previous established identity used by Bright on the SCP Wiki prior to changing to the current, non-username-compliant name. This is a separate proposal from the one above, but is being suggested here due to it being related.

Since the initial posting of this thread, Staff has completed working on Stages 1 and 2 of the roadmap.

Stage 1, as a reminder, was focused on compiling suggested proposals, or solutions to the ongoing issue. We took these suggestions from previous and current threads, as well as other staff proposal drafts. These proposals are all in a centralized place, so that when we are creating proposals to present, we can have a base to build off of.

Stage 2 was the largest phase of the project, in terms of work that was needed — and thanks to the many staff volunteers, we were able to get through this stage as well. In Stage 2, we assessed every work authored by Bright, and each work that backlinks or directly references a page within the text of the article.

If you are interested in the data, that consisted of 63 pages, authored by AdminBright, and 255 pages that link back to works they created.

For each of Bright's works, they were read and analyzed for problematic themes or details — this information will help us know the scale of what we are dealing with, as we move into solutions.

For each of the backlinked works, they were read, analyzed for their content, specifically focusing on *how* the page authored by Bright is included on the page, and *how reliant* the page is, on the original. This was a massive endeavor, with 963 having 96 backlinks on its own.

Once we did that, we checked all of our work - these pages are used both in the process of this effort, and as an archival database, so that the relevant information is preserved.

That brings us to today, or where we are now: Stage 3.

Stage 3 focuses on identifying the problems and solutions around all of this issue - as part of this stage, we have begun to make determinations about what we consider 'in scope' and 'out of scope', for this current roadmap.

By scope, we mean what we are trying to resolve in this first effort, and initial proposals; while the entirety of Bright's impact on the wiki is complex and widespread, the first priority is resolving Bright's works that remain on the wiki. Those works cause significantly more harm than the other aspects, and therefore, were important for us to ensure we addressed first, and in a timely manner, rather than getting bogged down in the sheer scope of the smaller problems.

To be clear: we are not saying that issues such as Bright's name, or works regarding the character, or AdminBright's contributions to collaboration pages aren't problematic, or important for us to resolve. We have sections in our plan to return to these issues, following the initial proposal.

It can help to think about this effort in Phases. Phase 1 is the current phase, directly focused on Works Authored by Bright. Phase 2 comes next, where we look at the other ways Bright contributed to the site, including collaboration logs and other edits. Phase 3 is the last phase, where we address the existence of Bright, the character, on the wiki, as well as any extant backlinks, details or otherwise.

Our priority is harm reduction; we believe that the phase structure will allow us to prioritize the issues that need to be resolved first, and address the other issues later. The reason I explain all of this is so that, when we get to the final proposals further down the road, your expectations are set. We cannot do this correctly, by trying to tackle everything at once, without slowing the process down — but by breaking it into phases, we can be sure the work gets done.

So, for now, we are in the middle of Stage 3, and will hopefully continue along this process without issue! Thanks so much for reading this, and I will speak to you all again on 05/19/2025!

This is a micro-update, just to reaffirm the fact that we are actively working on this process — while it may seem like we have been ignoring the ongoing discussions, our priority has been focused on progressing through the stages, so that we can get this resolved in a reasonable timeframe.

Since posting this thread, we have been working, and have reached Stage 2.2, where we are checking for backlinks. This is a non-standard update, to reassure the community that active progress is being made. We ask that you trust us to find the best resolution for this situation, and to give us the time to do it right.

There will still be a standard update on 05/05/2025, and moving forward there will most likely not be interim updates, but we wanted to address any concerns this early into the process.

Thanks so much!

Essentially, the proposals at the end of stage 5 may be less digestible, and more focused on the what of what is being done; the proposals in stage 6 are summarized, and simplified to a digestible form.

There is no formal 'bright team', this is a collaborative effort. I spent time to build this plan, granularize it, and to figure out a way to get this done without all of the work falling onto one person — I am fully transparent, the stage it says we are on is where we currently are.

We are actively working on this, to keep the ball moving, but it's all opt-in from staffers, so we're just making sure that this gets done right

So, yes, you are correct — no work has been done to remove, assess or otherwise address Bright's works, because, well, those are the next steps, as outlined in the roadmap.

I will frankly ask: what has the Bright team done to actually either remove, assess, or whatever to any of Bright's works? Because, again, from my perspective as someone who wasn't in the weeds of this, the most that was done was come up with a plan for a plan to tackle Bright.

Preamble

Hello all, this post is to update on the status of the Bright Works, and the staff effort surrounding that.

I wanted to begin with apologizing for the lack of communication on this, and the lack of updates. Behind the scenes, there has been further discussion about if this is just about deleting a handful of works, adding a disclaimer, or more; because of the scope of this project, we want to make sure that whatever we did, we did it right.

Some of you may know me, but in case you don't, I'm Queerious, wiki author and staff member — outside of the wiki, I have a background in organizational culture, project management, and cross-discipline collaboration. The reason I mention my credentials is this:

I am going to be coordinating this project moving forward, and plan on doing a full review of all Bright works, determining a set of potential solutions that are comprehensive, and then ensuring those plans are completed. I will be working with any and all staff members who are contributing, and we are going to be doing this as a collective staff team; in the past, we have had multiple attempts driven by a single staffer, and the weight of being responsible solely for this resolution just isn't reasonable. The only way that we are going to get this fully resolved, once and for all, is by doing so as a team.

So — what are we planning on doing?

The Plan

When we began to plan this project, we didn't just want to have a quick fix, of deleting or adding a disclaimer on just a few pieces. If we are going to address the Bright situation, then we are going to do so, in full — instead of putting a band-aid over the overtly problematic works, we wanted to fix this issue in its entirety.

To do that, we plan on assessing all of Bright's works on the wiki, compile a set of solutions to address the concerns of both staff, and the community, propose those solutions, and then execute the plan.

We want to make sure that not only are we addressing the issues that we, as staff, see with Bright's works, but also the communities — to do so, we plan on being thorough, and transparent about our progress in this effort.

Where We Are

Following the discussions, and then further internal conversations, this collaborative effort was proposed; since then, we have drafted our planned roadmap, and broken the massive project down into smaller steps. Our goal here was to ensure not only could we keep track of this effort, but so that the community was able to understand at a glance where progress was — there are a lot of moving parts to this, and we want to be open about how things are going.

As of last month, the plan has been detailed, in full, and we are now ready to begin the review process.

The Bright Works Project

To give insight into our plan, I wanted to explain the high level road-map we have set before us; this does not include a timeframe, because we are volunteers. However, our hope is that by showing where we are in the process, the community will get a better sense of how things are progressing, and will be able to see that work is being done.

High Level Roadmap

1. Assess Current Proposal Drafts
   1. As a collaborative group, we should identify existing proposals;
   2. We need to collate said proposals into a single place;
   3. As a collaborative group, we review the existing proposal(s) contents.
2. Assess All Bright Works for Content
   1. As a collaborative group, all works are checked for content, and subject matter;
   2. As a collaborative group, all works are checked for backlinks, and or significant contextual usage;
3. Ideate Solutions Collaboratively
   1. As a collaborative group, identify the key issues that need to be resolved (Partially Done)
   2. As a collaborative group, we need to determine potential solutions that would address the community's concerns, needs and staff's internal thoughts;
4. Refine Given Solutions
   1. As a collaborative group, we need to choose a set of proposed solutions to fully draft out;
   2. Each solution should be outlined at this stage, and have a high level summary written;
5. Write/Draft Proposed Solutions
   1. The largest phase; this is where individuals will be working together on a given proposal, to draft it;
   2. Internal review of said proposals, by admins, contributors, and any relevant teams;
6. Draft Proposal/Discussion Post
   1. As a collaborative group, we create a single proposal/post, outlining the chosen options, rationale etc;
   2. Once finished, the proposal should have approvals from admins and involved staff members, to ensure there is shared understanding internally;
   3. Thread is posted, and discussions occur; repeat as needed.
7. Voting
   1. Once discussions have been resolved, the proposal will be put to a vote (either community, or staff);
   2. Following the vote, if it passes, progress continues to implementation; if it fails, return to either discussion, or create alternative proposed solutions.
8. Implementation - REMOVE AND COUNTER
   1. Unlist all the pages listed as per the Remove and Counter proposal.
   2. Do concurrently:
      1. Create an updated version of the Bright note, which would be similar to the list deletion message but be more encompassing of the reasoning for staff's actions and the history of Bright and their abuse.
      2. Remove Bright's contributions to works they did not author themselves (e.g. collab logs).
   3. Do concurrently:
      1. Annotate certain select Bright articles to be hosted on the Bright note page, per R&C guidelines.
      2. Confirm procedure with regards to response pieces and how they will be handled.

What to Expect

Now that you have a sense of where we are headed, I wanted to take a moment to touch on how we will be keeping the community up to date.

This discussion thread will serve as an up-to-date status of the communal effort, and will be maintained and updated by me. At the top of this post, there is a block displaying our current phase within the roadmap; we are planning to work in a two-week cadence, and as such, I will update the thread every two weeks — because this is all volunteer, some periods may have less progress, while others may go more quickly. Our hope is that we will be able to slowly, but steadily, make progress and finally put this issue to rest.

Questions? Suggestions? Thoughts?

If you have any questions, suggestions, or thoughts, please feel free to discuss that below. We have created this plan, based on how we can best use our staff members — but if it doesn't end up working for us, it may change. If it does, I'll update this accordingly.

Otherwise, thank you all for reading this massive post. This issue is very important, and we want to ensure that it is done completely; we just ask that you give us the patience so that we can do things the right way.

EDIT: To address concerns, I want to clarify; as we go through this process, if we find solutions that require an accelerated timeline, or refining this roadmap, that will occur — but it will be based on having the information gathered, as outlined above. For now, the plan is going to stay this way, but can change in the future as the process continues.