The containment info is great. There's not much in the article beyond the conprots to warrant the Containment theme, yet it's absolutely deserved. The chamber is creative and really sells how much of a threat the anomaly is before its properties are even described. The image is decent, though pretty obviously AI-generated.

On the other hand, the supplemental page is weak and unnecessary. I feel the containment protocols set up the anomaly well enough, and I'm not too keen on supplemental pages anyway: they usually feel like they're just losing the plot, unless they're placed at the end of the article and/or obviously a separate piece from the main one. The grammar is also a lot less refined, most notably with the comically informal statement that "RPC-942 hates loud noises", as if it's a pet or something. The only thing I like about this is that it raises some okay scenarios.

I probably have more to remark on the containment protocols than on the anomaly itself, but it's serviceable. It exhibits clear sentience, and its skill at weaponizing objects makes it feel like a dynamic threat. I have a structural gripe, though: what it does to its victims is told at the very end of the description, after all the information about dormancy and chase periods. Therefore, that information is starved of important context, and when it finally arrives, it seems misplaced.

The photograph caption feels like too much information to its own detriment; it was taken from a phone? How close were they? It seems a little silly. Multimedia is always nice, though, and I particularly like how the second audio file was used. As with a lot of the article, it goes a long way in making the anomaly palpably imposing; the context reminds you how unpredictable it is, and the bangs put you in the shoes of someone uncomfortably close.

Perhaps the biggest issue I have with this article's delivery is how presumptious it gets with the "victim" stuff. The description does well in not calling it out directly; it gets away with the whole "fate worse than death" tactic that usually seems cheap by not verbally overexposing it. However, the discovery log and addendums talk a lot about "victims trying to escape" as if they personally know the guys. Clinical descriptions should usually avoid judgments like…

However, RPC-942 seemed to have kept one of its victims alive, possibly in attempts to perserve its "food".

…because stating so directly crosses the line from disturbing to cheesy. It's also more immersive to see that the Authority will catalog their findings as objectively as possible.

That being said, the ending is pretty great and messed up. The victims are badass for staving off the anomaly, and the anomaly is sick for physically chewing them up. You probably knew that already, but it's a smart balance established between existential horror and general "painful" horror that keeps the whole thing fresh, and a triumphant note to end on. Color me impressed!

Grammar was slightly less impressive. The author does evidently have a decent grasp of clinical tone, but there were a fair number of issues. Punctuation issues were the most global, with quite a few comma splices ("The cube is constructed with a layer of titanium, concrete, and an additional layer of steel for enhanced structural integrity, each layer must be at the minimum of 1.5 feet in width.") and the opposite, periods where they shouldn't be ("Other related attempts to use suction to restrain RPC-942 have only provided temporary containment. Rendering vacuum methods as emergency only.").

There are also a handful of awkward phrases, like "material kinds" when it should just say "materials", or "the speed of which a victim of RPC-942 is consumed at" when it should just say "the speed at which a victim is consumed", or "the cries began to cease". Lastly, there were some oddly informal lines, like the one about resulting "with deadly conseqeuences", which would still be comical without the typo. (Also, it's "result in", not "result with".) Then, "What set this tornado apart from typical meteorological phenomena was the presence of auditory phenomena" isn't strictly wrong, but it sounds less like a report and more like an essay.

Still, this is a superb first article! The main trick is simply being intimidating, which it does brilliantly. However, it is a bit one-dimensional, and I would like to see the author come up with something more dynamic and character-rich in the future. Regardless, what this does, it does well. 4/5

This whole article is a mess but I'll give it my best effort in order to point you into the right direction.

There's a lack of urgency in the Containment Protocols. Think of containment protocols as the hook for your article, they are what make people interested in the article before getting into the article.¹

RPC-942 is contained within a specially designed 20ft³ containment cube at Site-██. The cube is constructed within a [x m] layer of titanium, a [x m] layer of concrete, and an additional [x m] layer of steel for enhanced structural integrity.

Clinical tone is a double edged sword, its very demanding but very rewarding if you know how to use it. Even the addition of some measurements to the layers of the containment walls would give the reader an idea of how strong this thing is.

HOWEVER

Steel, concrete, titanium…these are very expensive materials to ''maybe'' contain an aerosol entity such as yours. It implies that the Authority isn't smart and they're just brute forcing the entity inside the chamber.

RPC-942 resembles a visible aerosol suspended in a spherical shape 16 meters in diameter when at rest, comprised of water droplets.

Like, this is not at all how you would contain a suspended aerosol! Think about how you would contain a living aerosol gas cloud. Would you make the temperature of the chamber to the freezing point, so that it cannot exists in a gaseous state? How about making a vacuum inside the containment chamber so that no waves can propagate and thus, neutralize RPC-942?

So the containment protocols are all wrong then. Believe it or not, the main problem is the description itself. It's very vague and lackluster, let's go back to the previous segment:

RPC-942 resembles a visible aerosol suspended in a spherical shape 16 meters in diameter when at rest, comprised of water droplets.

Clinical tone is about explaining information as precisely as you can with as little unnecessary wording as possible. Why is the anomaly so dark if it's comprised of ''water droplets''? It should be like, dark grey if that were the case (like the clouds on the tornado in the Discovery picture, top left). So either you need to: change the entirety of your images (too difficult), justify that despite being water it's dark for unknown reasons (lazy), or hint at another liquid all together (much more reasonable). If I were to describe RPC-942, it'd be something like:

RPC-942 is a dark, gaseous entity visually resembling a spherical cloud of aerosol paint. Its density and temperature are unknown, and the vapor its composed of has been determined to be a mixture of ink, paint, and another undetermined chemical.²

Moving on

While typically stationary, RPC-942 manipulates air currents around itself to change positions, usually when in pursuit of a target, recorded at up to 64 kilometers per hour. RPC-942 engages in this predatory behavior should it detect a living thing.

Too vague and too unprofessional. Predatory behaviour? You haven't gotten to that point yet! Don't worry, keep writing and you'll eventually learn more or less how to use clinical tone. Here's how I would reword it.

RPC-942 is capable of manipulating air currents around itself as means of movement, generating wind speeds up to 64 km/h.

Then we have

RPC-942 engages in this predatory behavior should it detect a living thing.

How VERY unspecific of you, you should dedicate a whole paragraph to this!

RPC-942 exhibits predatory and aggressive behavior when in close proximity of another living being. If the target is within its range, it will [do this and that and so on]. Repeated failed attempts to capture its target will result in [this and that and whatever yada].

And within this paragraph you should include the next one I'm about to reword:

How RPC-942 perceives is unknown, although it usually is only capable of sensing movement in close proximity to its suspended particles1, or within line of sight.

If the sentence describes how RPC-942 perceives, then it's not unknown is it? So what you meant to say was…

RPC-942 has demonstrated the ability to sense movement within an omnidirectional line of sight, as well as in close proximity to its suspended particles¹. The exact science behind this is unknown.

If you're smart, you'll know that half of this can be explained within the aforementioned paragraph. But you should dedicate a paragraph to the exponential growth on its agression:

RPC-942's size, wind speed, and aggressive behavior increase exponentially with time, with the largest recorded to be [this large and this strong] (see Discovery).

On rare occasions, RPC-942 will employ adjacent objects to aid in its chase.

So does it grab a table and throw it at its prey? You already described this behavior earlier, therefore, this sentence is redundant and should be removed.

Individuals that have been taken by RPC-942 are designated RPC-942-1.

I see virtually no point in classifying its victims as a secondary anomaly because at no point in the article do you describe what a RPC-942-1 is.

The speed of which RPC-942-1 is consumed at depends on how many individuals RPC-942 had consumed at the time, and whether RPC-942 is in an active state.

I thought it entered an active state whenever any living beings lied within its reach. What, does it have a friendly state where people can just come up to it and say hello?

Subjective opinion: this is not scary at all. All you need is a single sentence, in my opinion:

The speed of which RPC-942-1 is consumed at is relative to the wind speed achieved during its active state.

Audio Logs

You never mentioned RPC-942 could produce sound up until this point, but I'll let it slide! (You don't have to).

Recorded Audio of RPC-942 becoming active mid recording at the 18 second mark, the location of what caused its activation is unknown. RPC-942 commenced to violently strike its containment cube. The cube sustained some damage, although not much. This sudden enraged state lasted a full minute before RPC-942 calmed down.

The…what? Reword it to:

[…] the reason behind it remains unknown.

That whole thing I just striked through feels like it was pulled straight out of ChatGPT (because that's exactly what it does in AI generated RPC articles).

As for the second audio itself, it quite literally jumpscares you. I'd grab a sound editing software (or Sony Vegas) and edit it so that: 1) its less loud, 2) the background noise within the first 18 seconds coincides with the inactive state noise, 3) the sudden shift is more gradual, and 4) remove the background music (its there, faintly, but it does not remain for the entirety of the audio).

Lastly, where'd you get these audios from? I'd like to know the source, because I don't know if they are within the C.C license.³

Moving on

Reports document the manifestation of an EF3 tornado in [City], Missouri (USA).⁴ What set this tornado apart from typical meteorological phenomena was the presence of disturbing⁵ —whispers and anguished screams could be distinctly heard when one was within approximately 60 meters of the tornado's path.

During the second hour of the tornado's existence, at approximately 4:42 pm. An instance of RPC-942-1, displaying intense distress and erratic behavior, was observed attempting to escape the tornado's grasp.

But…you never even described what RPC-942-1 was. I thought the black cloud was RPC-942. What even is the difference?

IN SHORT (TL;DR)

Be more clinical
Imagine what you wanna describe, then do so as clinical as you can
Once you do that, fix the containment protocols
Detail what RPC-942-1 is
Stop using ChatGPT