1) I think you should add a red circle to highlight the KK facility entrance.
2) "RPC-XXX is to be fed only low-calorie and low-sugar food, but is to be given Oreo branded cookies as a reward for good behavior."
The bolded part sounds too strict/mandatory for what is to be a choice/reward. Suggest to tone it down to "but may be" to emphasize this as an optional possibility.
3) "for an ~1.8 meter" Highly subjective suggestion here, but suggest to change "an" to "a" because "a one-point-eight" rolls off the tongue smoother than "an one-point-eight"
4) "insect-like attributes, notably of lepidopterans"
Change to "insectoid" for more formal tone. add "that" between "notably of". Suggest to add footnote explaining that this is the insect order of butterflies and moths.
5) "RPC-XXX's eyes appear to be compound eyes, but RPC-XXX has stated that its sight is not affected."
Not affected? Suggest to reword to "has stated that its eyesight continues to utilize "camera-type" vision."
6) "These wings are similar in structure and appearance to that of moths, but do not function."
Do you mean they cannot support this entity's weight in flight, or can't even flutter at all? Needs to be elaborated.
7) [EXTRANEOUS LOGS REDACTED] (I think you should add in a "X:XX OF" before EXTRANEOUS to emphasize how much time was spent going down)
8) "Wha– oh, ok. I don't think we're you're "caretakers"."
you're = YOU+aRE so what you wrote here basically goes as "I don't think we're you are "caretakers".". The word you meant to use is the possessive "your".
Okay, so concluding thoughts:
9) You should also add in what species of lepidotera that this RPC's wings seem reminiscent of.
10) How good is this RPC's teeth that it hasn't rotted apart? Does it need dentistry work?
11) Want to include an interview of its life in RPC custody? Any complaints about being made to exercise?
12) For that matter, want to include HOW they managed to get this thing up all the stairs? And how long it took? There's a potential for a gag or two to be put in here.
I like it, all in all.
(account deleted) 10 Aug 2019 22:15
Jimmy, what's with the wonk bloody formatting, revert to the normal variant and resize that image to 300 px and set it to the right.
Containment Protocols:
RPC-XXX's containment chamber is to be fitted with a king-size mattress with a large duvet, and a treadmill.
A cot with a mattress and plain white sheets is enough, provided it at least gives RPC-XXX the ability to have a plain eight hours rest. You don't need to turn the humanoid anomaly's containment chamber into a literal hotel room.
but may be given Oreo branded cookies as a reward for good behavior.
This is just silly and pointless. You have the anomaly contained and a protocol to maintain in the case that it attempts to breach, leave it at that and remove this.
Description:
RPC-XXX is the designation for an ~1.8 meter tall female humanoid entity with insectoid attributes, that of lepidopterans1.
Reorganize the later part of the sentence, in this case: "… female humanoid entity with arthropod features commonly observed in lepidopterans (insert footnote)."
RPC-XXX's internal biology is identical to that of a human, however its external appearance possesses key differences to that of humans.
Yes, you just clarified that to the reader by telling them RPC-XXX contains said arthropod features; it's already an indicator of deviating anatomy. Recommend you reword to: "Despite existing external features, RPC-XXX's internal anatomy remains identical to that of a human's."
RPC-XXX has two antennae extending from its head, and skin that is light-grey in coloration and soft in texture.
Reword this to: "RPC-XXX contains a pair of functioning antennae originating from its head. Other physical abnormalities include light-gray pigmented skin of balmy texture."
RPC-XXX's eyes appear to be compound eyes, but RPC-XXX has stated that its eyesight continues to utilize "camera-type" vision.
Let's rewrite this to: "RPC-XXX additionally contains a pair of compound eyes; however, RPC-XXX states that its eyes exhibit perception and image resolution equivocal to that of a human's."
While RPC-XXX at first appears to lack a nose, analysis has proved RPC-XXX to possess two extremely small nostrils.
Reword to: "RPC-XXX exhibits very little external nasal anatomy, with the exception of two small nostrils in its nasal region."
RPC-XXX is fluent in Japanese, but knows a small amount of basic English.
Clinical recommendation: replace '…., but knows a small amount of basic English' -> '… and basic conversational English.'
Addendum XXX.1:
Nothing notably out-of-place in the addendum, save it's written in a comical format/setting that's atypical of most mainlist article-oriented dialogues.
Overview:
So, this article is rather 'meh.' It's mostly just a human-insect hybrid that exhibits no other anomalous properties other than its anatomy (even then, it doesn't provoke any interesting abilities/features either), as well as having the personality of your typical gluttonous teenage sloth. Specifically, these features make it come off more as a joke article than an actual mainlister, and readers specifically looking for something of a serious tone will either question why this is a mainlister or stop reading out of dissatisfaction.
The dialogue in the first addendum is 'lolAuthority' and is very atypical to how a professional MST would act in the presence of an anomaly for no reason other than comedic effect. The article is a bit too over-reliant on the anomaly's characterization rather than its own anomalous properties, which in this case could falter your reader's interest if there isn't anything of note to give them a reason to continue reading.
So overall, I don't feel this article is ready. My main issue is that RPC-XXX just simply doesn't produce any interesting anomalies other than a somewhat-warped appearance of a human/insect hybrid, and that caused my interest in the article to falter and made it more difficult to keep reading. Overall, I want you to work directly on its anomalous properties and provide it features that truly demonstrate as to why it is an interesting RPC, THEN focus on the characterization or narrative.
(account deleted), 10 Aug 2019 22:15
RPC-XXX's internal biology is identical to that of a human, however its external biology possesses key differences to that of humans.
Since you describe the external biology in the sentence before this, you could probably just merge the two instead of repeating that information like this
RPC-XXX has shown itself to be attached to food such as potato chips, burgers, ice cream, etc
Maybe you could just work this down to "common junkfoods" with a footnote or something
Model Number: S-783-880
This section is fine, but you might want to make there be less simple sentences, stuff like
"Mizuki-chan will have very soft skin. She will have soft fur around her neck and shoulders, which will be very fluffy for the purposes of cuteness." doesn't feel really clinical or anything, like someone is describing their ideal future spouse instead of a company representative speaking about the design of a future product/prototype
morbidly obese
Is this really accurate, given she's got no internal problems caused by it? This is mostly a nitpick
In summary, he told us that Mizuki-chan's obesity could give us a lift in marketing, as there are a surprising amount of people out there who think it's hot to be a wheezing blob of flesh.
This is implying they'd…. market the ability to make the consumer obese? Wouldn't it make more sense to decide this model worked better for like, chubby chasers/fat fetishists? At least, assuming it was something inherent to the product line rather than this specific individual's circumstances
At least we found a market for overweight products.
Not sure this works super well as an ending stinger, since it's information we're already aware of by virtue of the previous log.
Overall I kind of like it, I think it manages to skirt the line and not just be an extended fat joke most of the time which is definitely good, but it does dip into that a couple more times than I think it should. Still, I like Mizuki as a character, she's got some strong characterisation, and I like to think she's the prototype ancestor of the moth boy from Float Like A Butterfly, Sting Like A Sword
It’s crit time
No hazard image, brush
Containment Protocols:
Nothing to say here, no grammar errors, no word continuity, good containment.
Description:
“RPC-XXX is the designation for an ~1.8 meter tall female humanoid entity with arthropod attributes commonly observed in lepidopterans” RPC-XXX is the designation given to a 1.8-meter tall female humanoid entity with arthropodean attributes commonly observed in lepidopterans*
“Despite existing external features, RPC-XXX's internal anatomy remains identical to that of a human” No need for the “existing”
“RPC-XXX claims that its favorite food is Oreo branded cookies, but has also enjoyed eating burgers and ice-cream.” The last sentence fells over the top and unporfesional, you could change it to “But has show enjoyment from other eating other foods”
“RPC-XXX is fluent in Japanese and basic conversational American English. RPC-XXX refers to itself as "Mizuki".” Chnage the first RPC-XXX for “it is also fluent” as with the last paragraph and the next one, it’ll be 3 consecutive mentions of “RPC-XXX”
The felling I get from all of this is that you had many ideas and concepts to put on the table with the end results is kind of a mess, with qualities and details being thrown around without any continuity. That is to say, it’s not bad, but it could be better”
Discovery:
Nothing to see here, decent, I like that you didn’t censor any information.
Discovery.mp4:
“The following dialogue has been translated from Japanese.” Has been translated from Japanese to English*
“OF EXTRANEOUS LOGS REDACTED” idk what u mean by this chief.
A pretty good discovery log, I kinda fell the interactions between Gamma and RPC-XXX are kinda unprofessional, specially for (presumably) the only MST on Japan but I guess that’s up to personnel preferences.
Also, that last part with the fat shaming, not cool bro…. Not cool..
Addendum 2:
“The following files have been translated from Japanese.” From Japanese to English*
“カワイイ株式会社” i do not speak Japanese, so a footnote would be useful.
This last addendum was by far the thing in the article, very good.
Final thoughts:
An overall good article with a “weak” description, as I said, it just fells like a salad of ideas thrown together without consistency, but other than that, pretty good.
Let's begin!
What I liked
I find the imagery of a morbidly obese fucking moth to be quite hilarious, so there's that. Also, while I'm not a enterologist, the biology terms in this article seems to be adequately legitimate.
Grammar And Tone
As usual, not explaining everything. Especially when I'm on mobile. Yes, I typed this thing entirely on mobile. Sorry for the lack of coloured indications.
but may be given Oreo branded cookies as a reward for good behavior to make RPC-XXX less likely to attempt a breach of containment.
I feel like"given" and "make" aren't that clinical of terms. How about "provided with" and restructuring thr second half of the sentence to better the tone?
RPC-XXX contains a pair of functioning antennae originating from its head. Other physical abnormalities include light-grey pigmented skin of soft texture.
Maybe combine these two sentences? This is more of a pet peeve really.
While RPC-XXX at first appears to lack a nose, analysis has proved RPC-XXX to possess two extremely small nostrils.
I feel like this sentence's clinical tone is not up to point yet, butnI can't pinpoint why. Changing "a nose" to biology jargon might help.
I'd say that the grammar is decent while the clinical tone would also be fine after a few more proofreads. Nice!
Structure and Lore
Firstly, I have my reservations with the new MST here. Namely it's overlapping duties with Romeo-7 and it's pop-culture name.
Secondly, I'm not sure if the Authority would tell the reader what this thing was on the text that said "pls don't know what I am".
The logs from KK also seem a bit too unprofessional - then again it could be the nature of KK to sound unprofessional. I dlam unfamiliar with KK, after all.
Content
I find the idea to be absurd in just the right way. A obese fucking moth girl is innovation, man. That's really allnI have regarding it. It's obesity is also fairly well explained, so it's not just a "anomalous" trait that's there because.
I will say though, that the Authority not interviewing this thing is rather strange. Having interview logs should allow you to explore the narrative even further,as well as bring the structure of the narrative back to balance.
Narrative
So, balance. The building blocks for a good narrative are here, but their assembly would benefit from improvement. What do I mean by that?
A narrative usually means rising and falling action, or character development. Unfortunately, whatever rising action we may have here (like wtf happened to this place, why is this thing so obese) are resolved too quickly, and resolved independently.
In this article, we investigate an abandoned KK facility and chance encounter this thing quite soon into the investigation. That's what I mean by "resolved too quickly". The question of abandonment is also would benefit from being more linked to the investigation.
My suggestion would be to have the thing not be found until 2 investigation logs later, while setting up the existence of a monster in the KK facility that turns out to be the thing. Put elements of the reason of abandonment all over the thing.
Altogether, I would 2-3 this atm. He narrative has potential but is dragged down by the structure.
Suggested Reading
RPC-202 offers what I mean by setting up and inadequately structured payoffs.
SCP-2935 offers structure.
There! KK isn't something I'm familiar with so apologies for any mistakes.
