| type |
title |
author |
url |
date |
domain |
secondary_domains |
format |
status |
priority |
triage_tag |
tags |
processed_by |
processed_date |
enrichments_applied |
extraction_model |
| source |
SCP Foundation Wiki Governance: Deletion Guide, Site Rules, and Greenlight Process |
SCP Foundation Staff |
https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/deletions-guide |
2026-03-18 |
entertainment |
|
essay |
enrichment |
high |
entity |
| scp-foundation |
| governance |
| quality-control |
| peer-review |
| deletion |
| greenlight |
| collaborative-fiction |
|
clay |
2026-03-18 |
| consumer-acceptance-of-ai-creative-content-declining-despite-quality-improvements-because-authenticity-signal-becomes-more-valuable.md |
| community-owned-IP-has-structural-advantage-in-human-made-premium-because-provenance-is-inherent-and-legible.md |
| entertainment IP should be treated as a multi-sided platform that enables fan creation rather than a unidirectional broadcast asset.md |
|
anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5 |
Content
Comprehensive documentation of SCP Foundation's multi-layered quality governance system, synthesized from three official wiki pages (Deletions Guide, Site Rules, Greenlight/Draft Forum Policies).
Layer 1: Pre-Publication Quality Gates (Greenlight System)
- All NEW authors (no successful page yet) must get concepts reviewed and greenlighted by TWO experienced reviewers before requesting full draft feedback
- Greenlighters must meet criteria: Butterfly Squad Roster, Moth Squad, 3+ successful pages, or featured in Reviewers' Spotlight
- Greenlight = "vote of confidence that concept is solid enough to be drafted and will likely succeed on mainsite"
- Authors with 1+ successful page can bypass greenlight
- Drafts below minimum quality threshold receive boilerplate critique requesting author self-correct basic errors first
- Every article has discussion page for evaluation and critique
- Members vote for ANY reason, but reasoning must be based on article content
- Rating system drives quality: articles must maintain community support
Layer 3: Deletion Process
- Pages at -10 or lower become eligible for deletion
- Staff member posts "Staff Post" suggesting deletion with 24-hour timer
- Deletion requires 3 staff votes + timer expiry
- Pages at -20: timer suspended, eligible for immediate deletion with 3 staff votes
- If rating recovers above -10: all prior deletion votes voided, process restarts
- Authors may request deletion stays for rewrites
Layer 4: Summary Deletion (Bypass)
- Staff may immediately delete: malicious content, plagiarism, unfinished placeholders, improperly attributed collaborative works
- Permanent ban for: AI-generated text or images posted to user-facing content, plagiarism, vandalism
Governance Structure
- Staff-based hierarchical system: Disciplinary, Technical, Licensing, Chat, Curation teams
- NO formal community rank system — power concentrated in staff positions
- Staff handle discipline/infrastructure, NOT creative direction
- "Don't be a dick" as foundational principle
- No explicit canon governance — narrative coherence is emergent, not enforced
Key Data Points
- 9,800+ SCP objects, 6,300+ tales as of late 2025
- 2,076 pages uploaded in 2025, +84,329 cumulative votes, average +41 votes per article
- 70 new author pages in 2025
- 16 language branches internationally
- AI-generated content = permanent ban (parallel to fanfiction community norms)
Agent Notes
Triage: [ENTITY] — SCP Foundation as an entity with documented governance mechanisms. Also [CLAIM] material: the multi-layered quality system (greenlight → voting → deletion) is a specific, documented governance architecture.
Why this matters: This is the most detailed documentation of how a large-scale collaborative fiction project actually maintains quality. The four-layer system (pre-publication peer review → community voting → staff-initiated deletion → emergency bypass) is structurally analogous to academic peer review but applied to fiction.
What surprised me: The AI content ban. SCP Foundation — the most successful open-IP collaborative fiction project — permanently bans AI-generated content. This aligns exactly with the fanfiction community data (92% say "fanfiction is a space for human creativity"). Open IP + human-only authorship is a coherent, deliberate choice.
KB connections: GenAI adoption in entertainment will be gated by consumer acceptance not technology capability, consumer definition of quality is fluid and revealed through preference not fixed by production value
Extraction hints: The four-layer governance system deserves its own claim. The AI ban is significant evidence for existing authenticity claims. The "no canon governance" finding — that narrative coherence is emergent, not enforced — is the central insight.
Curator Notes
PRIMARY CONNECTION: community IP governance mechanisms (Session 5-6 research thread)
WHY ARCHIVED: Primary source documentation of the most successful collaborative fiction governance system. Provides verifiable mechanism details that theory articles lack.
Key Facts
- SCP Foundation has 9,800+ SCP objects and 6,300+ tales as of late 2025
- SCP Foundation uploaded 2,076 pages in 2025 with +84,329 cumulative votes, averaging +41 votes per article
- SCP Foundation has 70 new author pages in 2025
- SCP Foundation operates 16 international language branches
- SCP Foundation uses Creative Commons BY-SA 3.0 license for all content
- Greenlight reviewers must meet criteria: Butterfly Squad Roster, Moth Squad, 3+ successful pages, or featured in Reviewers' Spotlight
- SCP deletion process: -10 rating triggers 24-hour timer + 3 staff votes; -20 rating enables immediate deletion with 3 staff votes
- SCP Foundation permanently bans users for AI-generated content, plagiarism, or vandalism
6459163781