Three (3) bluebirds and four (4) house mice
One (1) pony
One (1) hug
You don't have to do this. It's also gone out of style, since it doesn't read well.
Falin: I suppose you aren’t familiar with ████, right? You look like you jumped out of a ████ ████. To describe them, they’re like moving picture books on a screen.
RPC-692: I would love to see one of your ████ ████ sometime!
the subject had violently █████ and fell into a state of unconsciousness
Censoring random words is a laughable trope that I recall being derided even back during SCP Series 1.
Containment Protocols
Anything that is to be given to RPC-692 is to be scanned multiple times for plastic and other cheaply-made resources beforehand, any and all dinnerware is to be made with either metal or porcelain.
Comma splice, could be made a semicolon. "Cheaply-made resources" is vague.
The subject is to be regularly interacted with at timely intervals.
Also vague
Description
RPC-692 is a humanoid entity appearing as an adult female human of European descent that claims to be of royal ancestry, measuring 165 cm in height with a slim build.
Move "that claims to be of royal ancestry" to the end of the sentence (put a comma after "build" to accommodate).
The entity appears to not require excretion of most bodily fluids, despite eating and drinking. If it has the capability to do so is unknown.
I understand your hesitation, but "excretion of most bodily fluids" is a poor way to describe defecation/urination, especially since the context of "despite eating or drinking" is pushed to the end of the sentence (it should be at the start either way). The second sentence is pretty hilarious to me: "We're researching if the princess can poop." Back off, man. (I'd imagine scientists would be interested in studying her digestive system, though, which is never followed up on.)
The entity is capable of completing basic organizational problem-solving and self-sustainability
"Completing" is redundant. "Capable of […] self-sustainability" should be "self-sustainment".
RPC-692 doesn’t appear to understand concepts with negative connotations. [Footnote: death, anger, etc.]
Expand the contraction to "does not". "Concepts with negative connotations" is unclear due to subjectivity, and relying on examples to fix it is poor form. "Concepts that it would find distressing" is a start. It would probably be better if you focused on how "not understanding" manifests in practice, since this sentence is obnoxiously on-the-nose.
can best be described as agreeable and sympathetic to a fault
Informal
When approached, RPC-692 will greet any nearby person with overwhelming positivity, asking if they would like anything.
Whiplash from vague and subjective to suspiciously precise. Is "would you like anything" the only way she ever greets anyone? Also, "when approached" and "any nearby person" don't gel together; the logic dictates that every time someone walks up to her, she'll greet everyone around, even if she's already greeted them before.
RPC-692’s sebaceous glands produce a scented oil [Footnote: sebum] that most would describe as “flowery” or “soothing”. Recorded scents include lilacs, lavender, roses, whipped vanilla and honey.
These two sentences are out of place, being surrounded by description of her personality. It would currently fit much better if you moved this to the fourth paragraph. However, I feel the description as a whole would work better if all the physical description went at the start.
As for the excerpt itself: the footnote is useless. Say "scented sebum" in the main text if you want, otherwise ditch it. "Most would describe" is another excuse for informality.
RPC-692 has been observed to showcase mild to moderate memetic properties, with the subject’s presence capable of “lifting the mood” of any sapient being within a 15m radius.
"Has been observed to showcase" is unnecessary hedging. "Mild" and "moderate" are synonyms, so "mild to moderate" doesn't make sense. Scare-quotes informality substitutes for clinical description.
When RPC-692 emits any form of musical sound [Footnote: humming or singing], any humans within close proximity will begin to gradually follow along, though this effect is temporary.
"Emits any form of musical sound" is awkward and relies on a footnote to make sense. You may be best off rephrasing the whole start, since "when" implies that this "humming or singing" has been previously introduced.
Cut "begin to gradually", and I don't know what "follow along" means. Join in the song? Physically follow her? "Though this effect is temporary" steals too much attention and could just be an adverb of "temporarily" on "follow along".
I know it might seem easier to just give it fake jewellery for the sake of convenience, but this is a living, breathing entity we’re dealing with here.
If you don't want to treat her well, why would you give her jewelry to begin with? Why would anyone give her fake jewelry except for the purpose of harming her? This whole note boils down to "follow proper procedure," which doesn't need to be said.
- Dr. ███
For this and other personal notes throughout the draft: it's common to do something like this:
—Dr. ███
You can make an em dash by putting two hyphens back-to-back in the source code. Be warned that using two of them in one paragraph without surrounding them by spaces will create a strikethrough instead. Alternatively, you can just copy the one above and paste it into your source and you won't have to worry about any of that.
Discovery
RPC-692 was found wandering around a western European forest near the town of ███ during a heavy rainstorm (██/██/20██), upon approach, the subject immediately accepted being taken into custody.
Comma splice, could be a semicolon
This section is one sentence long?
Interview
And why does it smell like lilacs here? We don’t permit the use of perfume on site.
They should've confiscated any objects from RPC-692's person when she was recovered, and Falin should know this.
I’ll add that to the page, I’ll let you know if it gets approved.
Comma splice, but I can excuse as an indicator of dialogue pacing. What I will say is that these two similarly-worded sentences sound awkward when actually spoken aloud.
Dr. Falin looked into the country of M█████, to find that there’s no country by that name, existing or defunct.
Expand the contraction to "there is". It's kind of goofy to indicate that Falin did it personally; "No country, existing or defunct, goes by the name of M█████" would suffice.
Requests to find the “hole” mentioned by RPC-692 are pending (as of ██/██/20██)
Should be "requests to search for", not "requests to find". I find this sentence kind of superfluous anyway, since it's not like they wouldn't be investigating an anomaly. This isn't followed up on regardless and could be removed.
Item Request List
Item(s) Request
"Item Request" is fine and would scan better.
Subject behavior seemed to improve from then onward.
When was her behavior bad?
“No. Unless it was an anomalous horse, we aren’t going to waste even more valuable resources trying to get and/or keep a pony. Please, think realistically.” - Director █████
Who is he telling to "think realistically"? RPC-692? Also, he already banned requests for "live nonanomalous animals", so he doesn't need to justify this one further.
Researcher Hawkins went in and gave RPC-692 a hug. Reports of heightened mood and overall better work output noted.
I presume the second sentence refers to Hawkins, but the subject is unclear.
Incident 692-Mayflower
RPC-692 was provided a dress by Junior Researcher ████ upon request, which unknowingly contained plastic microfibers.
"Which unknowingly contained plastic microfibers" is a dangling modifier, and the subject of "unknowingly" is also uncertain. The sentence might need rearranged: "RPC-692 requested a dress; the item, supplied by Junior Researcher ████, contained plastic mibrofibers, which were not known to harm RPC-692 at the time."
Falin: 692? Are you there?
"692" as a nickname is weird; if Falin's being formal, she'd say "RPC-692". If she's being casual (as this type of interview ought to, so as to avoid disclosing classified information and/or to keep the subject comfortable), she'd call her by her name.
692 opens its eyes
In this case there's no reason to be informal.
RPC-692: ..In that case, yes.
You use two periods here when I think three would look better. (Wikidot automatically condenses three consecutive periods into a compact ellipse character, too.)
RPC-692 would recover from its injuries █ hours(s)
Besides the "hours(s)" typo, it doesn't make since for a blackboxed unit to receive the ambiguous "(s)"; blackboxes are implied to have been placed over the article after it was written, so it would be "█ hours" (or "█ hour", but at that point censorship is useless).
Event 692-072
RPC-692 is given expressed permission by Dr. ████ to enter RPC-072’s containment chamber. Dr. ████ and Researcher ██████ observing.
The switch to present tense is jarring. I don't mind it in the log, since it's an active transcript, but I think this should be past tense.
13:01 PM:
Emboldening these timestamps in the log would look nice.
RPC-692 appears to begin singing and dancing, spectrogram analysis of the sound showcases a sudden shift in pattern.
Comma splice. It's clever how both sentences allude to the fact that the audio signal mustn't be listened to, but "sudden shift in spectogram pattern" seems like an overexplanation to say a noise is being made (I know it's probably trying to refer to 072, but the crystal hum wouldn't be isolated in the signal), and "appears to begin dancing" is superfluous (but "appears to begin singing" is perfect).
Basically, say "begins to dance and appears to sing, as corroborated by spectrogram analysis."
RPC-692 shows signs of immense joy.
Describe them!
RPC-072 frequently pulsed to the sound of RPC-692’s voice until testing was halted.
Past tense is inconsistent with the rest of the log, and alluding to future events doesn't fit the timestamp setup. Say "RPC-072 begins pulsing to the sound of RPC-692's voice" and leave it at that, since the sound isn't going to continue after the test anyway.
13:11 PM: RPC-692 leaves the chamber, describing the experience as "serendipitously wonderful” and that it would “love to do it again”. Signs of withdrawal from RPC-692 have yet to be recorded after testing was complete, heightened mood noted.
Only the first sentence occurs in the log at the specified time code. The rest should be a new paragraph outside the log. Also, I feel what you're going for with "heightened mood noted", but it looks weird and is too vague anyway.
"[…] after testing was complete, and it has since exhibited a heightened mood" would work, except it seems difficult for RPC-692's mood to be heightened any further than normal anyway.
