Talk:SCP: Secret Laboratory

Latest comment: 1 year ago by TheKidWhoEdits in topic Potential Source for "Roles" Section

Contested deletion edit

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... (your reason here) --Aevann (talk) 14:59, 26 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

I removed copyrighted text.

I AM NOT A EMPLOYEE OF NORTHWOOD STUDIOS!!!! Guys i am not I just like the game and like editing wikipedia! --AndrewMidkiff (talk) 19:21, 29 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Edits edit

I've rewritten much of the article to better comply with various sourcing and manual of style requirements. The content is honestly pretty sparse, but with the available sourcing this is about as good as we are going to get. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:25, 11 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

SCP list section should include the SCPs titles. edit

It should have their titles and details about how they work in-game.169.244.116.71 (talk) 13:35, 15 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

added cleanup tag edit

I can't remember what the specific term is, but this article has a lot of information that I'm pretty sure is too specific and listy to be anywhere but a Fandom wiki. casualdejekyll (talk) 15:11, 27 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

  • To be more specific, something that immediately jumps out is that the list of SCP's here is longer then the list of SCP's on the SCP Foundation article, which is just not all that necessary casualdejekyll (talk) 15:18, 27 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • I just went ahead and deleted the SCPs section. WP:BOLD I guess. Feel free to revert or check the history for any salvageable information casualdejekyll (talk) 15:20, 27 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

SCP 173 has not been updated yet. edit

The recent edit describing 173 is wrong. I will change this soon. Please do not change it back. Porinc (talk) 20:40, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Cleanup edit

Soooo I'm new, I like this game, but after reading Wikipedia for a long time I want to say that this article is a bit of a mess and I'm not sure whether or not it even qualifies as relevant enough. I'm thinking of rewriting a few sections, can anybody check in when I'm done? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheKidWhoEdits (talkcontribs) 14:14, 14 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Attempts at improving the article edit

1. The Description is like 90% of the article. I think it should be shortened.

2. The other sections need more info in them.

Some sources:

-- MrRhino683 (Talk) 14:19, 3 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Potential Source for "Roles" Section edit

Roles section needs a lot of work, if it's even necessary at all. But there's basically no form of reliable source on it; best I could find is this article but I'm not going to try and interpret it.

TheKidWhoEdits (talk) 15:34, 8 July 2022 (UTC)Reply