Per 
To Do:
notes
- Trevor Henderson's big Charlie
- Pregnant cow was sold to farm/slaughter house but the seller wouldn't acknowledge the fact that she was pregnant, she gave birth to big charlie
- He was so big he accidentally ripped out of her
- Decided to keep him and try to make money off of him
- Nobody would buy him
- Tried to kill it with the cattle gun but its skull was too thick
- Since they couldn't kill him with the cattle him gun tried just cutting the meat right off but he wouldn't die as they kept cutting so they left him there and they eventually noticed he had started to grow the meat back the next morning
- eats the other cows when unsupervised but they don't care
- They didn't show him off or anything because they knew that nobody would buy from them ever again because they would think he's some mutant cow and the meat would be toxic
- Kept in back of barn, never let outside
- owner and workers were interrogated by site personnel
- the slaughterhouse he escaped from was burned and the owner and workers were sealed inside (after they were all interrogated)
- constantly gaining mass so meat has to be sheared off like a kebab
- "SCP-XXXX is a 9 year old bovine-esque creature measuring 3.4 meters tall and 5 meters long. Its skin is thin, appearing translucent and ripping easily which is most likely credited to its constant growth not allowing its skin to properly grow with its body. SCP-XXXX has a bulbous head lacking most facial features of bovine that it shares heritage to. SCP-XXXX is partially blind. SCP-XXXX is sentient and docile; not acknowledging personnel during feeding or cleaning of its cell. SCP-XXXX does not produce excrement."
- the meat produced by SCP-XXXX is USDA Utility grade beef
our cast
Rory Gildson: worker #1 knows birth, knows about shearing, sick the day of escape
Barney Mossman: worker #2 does NOT know about birth, does NOT know about shearing, only knows that he's valuable, just the custodian
Jeff Fine: manager bought the pregnant mom, learned about birth from Rory and Brian, told to sell it, when they couldn't sell it he told them to kill it, when couldn't he realized the infinite meat, told them not to tell anyone, prayed to it
Yo! I can take a quick look at this.
First of all, this does seem like a rather interesting idea. For a while I was worried it would end up being something like a 682 clone, what with the regrowing and such, but I was pleasantly surprised by this. Pretty much everything in the anomaly makes sense, and description of how it came to be was rather cool and somewhat shocking.
Conceptually I have no real issues with it, other than the interview logs read somewhat oddly. The second and third ones read like "tell me about it", "no", "pleaaaaaaaase", "fine". There's no resistance at all and the way they coerce them into talking doesn't feel like something that would really convince them well. Also, the Foundation doesn't kidnap people and make them D-Class, D-Class are death row prisoners. They would amnestize these people and send them home (but they probably wouldn't tell them about amnestics anyway).
Line-By-Line
SCP-XXXX is to be kept in a 8 meter by 10 meter cell in the medium containment zone of site 64.Measurements shouldn't be included unless they are essential to containment. E.g., it's okay to say 'standard' and you don't need to include the measurements at all, as that can actually cause more trouble and questions more often than not.
Also, it should be Site-64, with a capitalized Site and a hyphen between.
The cell is to be fitted with a 5 meter trough on the East wall of the cell.
Again, unimportant measurements and East is not a proper noun so it isn't capitalized.
Personnel can request a maximum of 450 grams of meat for personal use per week. Requests for portions of meat under 450 grams must be approved any scientist with 02 permissions and above who is currently assigned to SCP-XXXX.
Never say that you can feed your personnel the anomaly. There is no reason and can potentially endanger your staff. It's honestly just bad form all around.
Around the clock monitoring is not necessary though it must be checked at a minimum of thrice a day.
Unnecessary. The Foundation doesn't have infinite people and if they can just put something in a cage and leave it they will. Just delete this sentence.
Its skin is thin, appearing translucent and ripping easily.
*rips easily
SCP-XXXX is partially blind and has a bulbous head lacking most facial features of bovine that it shares an alleged heritage to.
The alleged heritage to is awkward. The sentence should probably be amended to something like "SCP-XXXX is partially blind, and has a bulbous head, which bears no resemblance to any bovine species."
X-rays are to be performed on SCP-XXXX before and after shearing.
Why?
The meat produced by SCP-XXXX is USDA Utility grade beef and has shown no signs of anomalousness.
Anomalousness is not a word. This should be "shows no anomalous properties".
Personnel can request meat for personal use, being allotted a maximum of 450 grams of meat per week.
You said this earlier but again, don't do this ever.
There were also signs of a second brain forming which is when The Facility opted to cease testing and disallow further growth.
What is The Facility, and why is it capitalized? Also, it's a little awkward to read, it should be more like "When signs of a second brain began to grow, The Facility opted to…"
A facility plant then contacted the local site 64 to send containment specialists to transport it.
Wait, did you mean Foundation?
All were interviewed under oath and while using a polygraph. Interview Logs Follow
You don't interrogate people under oath, an oath is only used in court usually. Also Interview Logs Follow doesn't have a purpose because the interview logs follow.
Fuck you. What am I here for? I'm innocent. Fuck you. Let me go!
Two fuck yous is a little much.
Interviewer: Well alright then, Mr. Mossman, I guess if that's all you can tell us then we're done here.
Just end the log here tbh.
It is currently not believed that Geoff Fine's worshiping of SCP-XXXX is not due to any anomalous effect,
*worshipping
All in all, this is good but there's more edits that I would definitely recommend. After this you should continue to get crit on it because I couldn't touch on everything, and I still had some lingering conceptual issues that I couldn't put my finger on well enough to really comment on. Good luck! If you have any questions feel free to PM me on wikidot or just send it here.
- Stallmatic
My Response
Thank you so much for reading it! Im glad you liked it! Yeah, it definitely needs editing and I don't claim to be good at dialogue, but im glad you liked it! Your critiques are super helpful but i think some of the problems could be explained. So first, I didn't have to foundation kidnap them and turn them into D-Class. I think you mean the part where he says "Dr. ███ ██████ will take you to the D-Block where you will be held for an indeterminate amount of time until it is time to administer your amnestics." which i just mean like he'll be held in the same cells as the D-Class until they finish all the interviews and testing which is when they will then give them the amnestics before releasing them. Next, the reason i mentioned the measurements of the cell is because it's not a standard cell, its much bigger since hes super big and could get even bigger. But you're definitely right about the trough measurements, its unnecessary. With the around the clock monitoring bit, i feel like it fits because theses are the containment procedures, it tells you what youre supposed to do, and they should check on it to make sure its not growing too big. Next, i feel like they should do xrays to make sure they didnt miss any thing new growing before they pack it up for the week. Also, worshiping is spelled with one P according to my auto correct.
And I can not BELIEVE that I kept saying The Facility instead of The Foundation! I feel like a total idiot! THANK YOU for pointing that out! i would have been excommunicated!
I'm glad that was just a misunderstanding and not a "The Foundation is needlessly evil moment", It probably could've been made a little more clear that they would be released, especially considering both of the people it is said to are clearly concerned that they will never be let out, but I'm glad I just didn't quite understand what you were saying. "The Foundation Eats Babies" trope is one of my biggest pet peeves.
The around-the-clock monitoring thing just feels a little unnecessary due to you already mentioning that they periodically shear things off of it. I don't know why I didn't consider the x-ray to be important though, I guess I just momentarily forgot that you mentioned extra organs could grow in and such. Also, after a little bit of googling I discovered that both "worshiping" and "worshipping" is correct, it's just an American/British difference like color/colour and such.
Well, best of luck to you, I still would recommend getting more diverse crit, as I am very much not an infallible person and there's tiny things about this that irk me which I can't quite place, but all in all, solid article.
Alright author, let's see what we've got here!
Concept
I think the article is missing its payoff. We get the backstory in the interviews, but that's really it, and the article ends after that. I think giving readers some updates that Charlie is growing faster, that he is getting agitated with containment, or some other new development would be a decent note to end on.Overall, this is pretty good, so congrats on that author!
Execution
Each section of your article should have a bolded header, so the interview section should have a proper addendum title as opposed to the line break. Your notes at the end should also have some kind of header, even if it is just an update.As mentioned in concept, you do need to work on the ending, but besides that, this is pretty good execution-wise. Your code is clean and don't have any egregious organizational errors.
Line-by-line
Tried to fix up some wordings to mend up your clinical tone a little bit. Thankfully, you've got a decent foundation (heh), so there wasn't too much.thrice a day
Three times a day
Its skin is thin, appearing translucent and ripping easily.
Its skin is thin, transluscent, and easily ripped.
SCP-XXXX is partially blind and has a bulbous head lacking most facial features of bovine that it shares an alleged heritage to.
SCP-XXXX is partially blind and has a bulbous head that lacks the primary features of a bovine, despite its alleged lineage.
Or something like that.SCP-XXXX is constantly growing in size and weight meaning that excess mass must be sheared off once every week.
SCP-XXXX is constantly growing in size and weight. As such, excess mass must be sheared off once a week.
X-rays are to be performed on SCP-XXXX before and after shearing.
This should be in the con procs.
Despite this, the resulting meat is to be incinerated.
You already said this in the containment procedures.
When SCP-XXXX is not sheared of its excess mass, new features begin to form, including limbs, genitalia, and, in rare cases, organs.
Needs some commas, bolded above.
The largest SCP-XXXX ever got before testing was ceased was 8.5 meters tall and 9.8 meters long featuring 7 legs, 4 stomachs, 2 penises, 5 testicles, and 2 tongues.
At its largest, SCP-XXXX grew to be 8.5 meters […]
There were also signs of a second brain forming which is when the Foundation opted to cease testing and disallow further growth.
Testing was halted after SCP-XXXX began showing evidence of neural tissue generation.
The types of limbs and the locations where they form are different every time.
The anatomy and placement of exterior growths are seemingly random.
In the event of an unregulated growth scenario its object class is to be reevaluated.
I don't like this sentence. If the cow never tops growing, the Foundation's last concern will be updating their documentation. They should begin emergency shearing and then update documentation.
Upon discovery of SCP-XXXX, they called the local police department at 9:39.
Try to avoid pronouns in scientific documentation for clarity purposes.
A Foundation plant then contacted the local site 64 to send containment specialists to transport it.
Same goes for transitory phrases like "then" and "afterwords". Bad for clinical tone. Just say what happened in the order that it happened in. Also, remove "the local". It should be assumed that Site-64 was the right place to contact, for whatever reason.
Class A anesthetics were administered to the animal control officers and the case was closed, reporting it as being a cow with mange that was put down at the scene.
Since it was reported to be a large cow with mange, just amnesticizing the officers and getting out of there should suffice. No need to dispel a cover story.
SCP-XXXX was transported to site 64 at 12:46 with no resistance from SCP-XXXX. Containment Specialists tracked the origin of SCP-XXXX to a slaughterhouse by the name of Butcher's Block. Two employees and a manager were located in connection to the slaughterhouse. One employee named Barney Mossman and the manager named Geoff Fine were located at the slaughterhouse and taken into Foundation custody. One more employee named Rory Gildson was later found at his residence at ███ ████ ██████ after calling in sick that day.
All of these sentences are super short and choppy, which is a deviation from the writing style used earlier in the article. I suggest editing these sentences to make them flow a little better. Combining a few of them should do the trick.
All were interviewed while using a polygraph.
Polygraph tests are notoriously unreliable. I suggest cutting this out.
Oh, I'm sorry, SCP-XXXX is the bovine creature you claimed belonged to your employer.
This exchange about the designation shouldn't happen. Just say the large bovine from the get-go.
Dr. ███ ██████ will take you to the D-Block where you will be held for an indeterminate amount of time until it is time to administer your amnestics.
This is a rather… straightforward debriefing. I think it would just be better to just note that this is what happened to the guy. Have the agent conclude the interview before this line. This also avoids misunderstandings like the one that Stall expressed. If I hadn't read his review, I might have assumed the same thing (Foundation eats babies).
Oh, well we will correct that. Let's start the interview.
I say cut the opening banter.
Interviewer: (Aside) Make sure that any record of that ad is replaced with something about a position to work there or something.
This should also be a note outside of the interview for professional purposes. This dude doesn't need to hear this. I assume whoever is supervising the interview would be on this as soon as they heard it.
Alright. Well we placed the ad but nobody would bite so we decided that it was just a waste to keep it, and it probably wouldn't be a good idea to release it into the wild, as that could fuck up the ecosystem or something, so we decided to finally put it out of it's misery. […]
This is a very long chunk of text for an interview, and as such, is kinda hard to read. I suggest breaking it up into at least 2-3 parts somehow (maybe include a pause, sigh, or description of movement).
so we decided to receive the blessing from him.
Why does the interviewer just gloss over this very strange sentence? I suggest cutting it out so that the "To Big Charlie" line has more impact.
How dare you question Big Charlie!
Strange thing to say in anger. If you want this guy to get mad, have him start asking to see his cow, or have him ask what will happen to his cow and flipping when they tell him.
Overall, I can see this making it on the mainlist with a few proofreadings for clinical tone. Do note that I only point out an error once, and then don't mention it again, even if it reappears. Definitely check for recurrences of the same issues.
Good luck author!
Line-by-Line / Technical Critique
[…] medium containment zone of Site-64.Site-64? This isn't a critique, just wondering.
Around the clock monitoring is not necessary […]
"Around the clock" doesn't feel very clinical here. Even "24/7" feels a bit nonchalant, but I think it would be better. I think the best substitution here would be "constant". "Constant monitoring is not necessary […]". Also, you should put a comma after "necessary", and the following "it" should be "SCP-XXXX".
[…] has a bulbous head that lacks the features of a bovine of which it shares an alleged lineage.
I'm not sure how yet, but this could be said better. Hmm… well, I know one issue. You describe what features it doesn't have, but not what features it does. I know we have an image (so don't spend too much time on this description), but what about its head isn't bovine, hmm? What features does it have? It'd be weird if I were writing an SCP document without an image, and it was about a centipede, and all I did was say:
"Despite resembling a centipede, SCP-XXXX's legs are not centipede like."
And then leaving it there. Like, then what are they like? See what I mean? Put more description in your description. Alright, moving on.
[…] has shown no signs of anomalous properties.
Remove "signs of", make it "has shown no anomalous properties".
Despite this, the resulting meat is to be incinerated.
A. We've already been told this in the containment procedures (where it rightly belongs, as this is a procedure and not a descriptor).
B. If you did want to have this information in the description, you need to describe something about it. Seeing as the containment procedures are about purely the procedures and leave no room for description, this is your chance to tell us why we incinerate it. I mean, one can imagine that it's a cautionary measure… but write that in!
"Despite this, the resulting meat is to be incinerated as a cautionary measure."
That'd be a good thing to keep in. Moving on…
When SCP-XXXX is not sheared of its excess mass new features begin to form including limbs, genitalia, and in rare cases organs.
The case of the missing commas! This sentence requires a lot more commas than you apparently think it does. Before we battle about the grammatical validity of whether or not it needs said commas, I implore you to read over this sentence and feel the pacing. If someone said this, only adding pauses in where you put commas, it would feel like they were seriously rushing, and perhaps nervous. So, some suggestions for pacing:
"When SCP-XXXX is not sheared of its excess mass, new features begin to form, including limbs, genitalia, and, in rare cases, organs."
If you want to get some comma crowding out of there, you could do this:
"[…] and — in rare cases — organs."
That would read far closer to how it would be said, which would in turn make the reader read it at a reasonable pace.
[…] before the Foundation decided to cease testing and disallow further growth. Testing was halted after SCP-XXXX began showing evidence of neural tissue generation.
Repetition often feels bad to read. Easy fix here, though. I'd axe "cease testing and" to make it just "decided to disallow further growth". Which, actually, you can shorten to "before the Foundation disallowed further growth". I think that would read best.
Testing was halted after SCP-XXXX began showing evidence of neural tissue generation. The anatomy and placement of exterior growths are seemingly random. In the event of a scenario where growth can not be regulated the object class is to be reevaluated.
These three sentences feel completely disconnected from one another, having no right to end a paragraph together. Here's what I would suggest. Put the first sentence in a footnote after "disallowed further growth", so it would read like "disallowed further growth1".
I would change the "are" in the second sentence to a "were", to connect it to the previous sentence where you talked about how big the thing had gotten (with so many tongues, penises, etc.).
In the event of a scenario where growth can not be regulated the object class is to be reevaluated.
A. Missing a comma. Put a comma after "regulated", so it reads "can not be regulated, object class is to be reevaluated".
B. "In the event of a scenario" literally means "in the event of an event", so you should do some cutting. Make it "in the event that growth […]".
C. Move this to the containment procedures. It has no right being in the description.
Class A anesthetics were administered to the animal control officers […]
Anesthetics? I think you mean amnestics.
SCP-XXXX was transported to site 64 […]
Site-64, you mean.
Containment Specialists tracked the origin of SCP-XXXX to a slaughterhouse by the name of Butcher's Block where one employee named Barney Mossman and the manager named Geoff Fine were found and taken into Foundation custody.
Another case of missing commas! I would nick both "named"s, and instead have a comma before and after each name. So, "one employee, Barney Mossman, and the manager, Geoff Fine, were found […]". Like that. I'd do the same thing in the next sentence for Rory.
[…] at his residence at ███ ████ ██████ after calling in sick that day.
This has taken too much of my attention, but… what the hell place would be spaced like that? And especially a place that's just in town? Why would a house have that weird and specific a name? What? So, I'd cut it. I'd just cut "at ███ ████ ██████".
All three persons were taken to site 64 for questioning.
Site-64, again.
Okay, so, I've gone long enough without talking about the images. I reverse image searched on the internet, and it looks like they're original… which is really impressive! They're great looking! However, the second one (which isn't in the article yet) is much better looking than the first one. Why? Because the pallet of colors mesh. That cow thing in the second image feels like it's there, because the lighting is done very well. The first one does indeed feel like something added into the image. But… I think I have a solution.
The first image is all blue-tinted, right? It looks that way to me. But the cow thing is still all red and shiz. I think, to make it look more fitting, you need to make it more blue-tinted (and dull-colored).
Okay, onto the interviews…
So you don't know the origin of SCP-XXXX?
I know, yes, I know that a lot of articles, even very successful articles, have interviews offhandedly use the skip's designation number. But, really, why? To do this, they would have to have briefed the guy beforehand on what the designation number is (which would go against him not knowing that they were gonna be talking about "Big Charlie", as they would have already had to have established that with him to let him in on the designation). Plus, it hints at a much bigger picture that a civilian should not be trying to grapple with in the midst of an important interview. They would just call it the "cow creature" or whatever.
Also, why is Mossman being so cooperative? His first words were "fuck you", I imagined him to be a little more stubborn about giving information.
Please to remove the horizontal line at the bottom of the Mossman interview (and the other interviews, if it exists there as well). Other than Mossman seemingly going against his setup character, the interview reads fine and fairly believable. I'd just make him more of a stickler, someone they have to push a little harder for information.
So what can you tell me about SCP-XXXX?
Same issue, except it's slightly more believable here because Rory acts like he's a little more ready for the interview, like he's been briefed or something. Still wouldn't recommend it though. Maybe use "Big Charlie", like they picked that up from Barney and they're gonna use it to feel more familiar to the next interviewed people? Seems to me like something they would do.
Let's start at the beginning, where did SCP-XXXX come from and how did he come into your possession?
That comma should either be a semicolon or a period, seeing as it separates two complete sentences.
[…] so we took it inside and posted an ad in the local papers-
Maybe this is just a stylistic thing, but I'd do it "ad in the local papers—". The longer dash looks better, in my opinion. Also, to get it, you can do two dashes, just like this:
—
But they have to be not touching anything else, or you get crossout, like this. So, if you want a big dash touching things, you have to copy and paste or else find the keyboard shortcut to make it (I am no expert on those, so good luck). Anyways, I think it looks a lot better than such a small dash. Sorry, moving on…
Err, there's no reason to have that bit at the end of the Rory interview. It's not necessary for documentation, so they wouldn't record it. Us, as the readers, are probably familiar enough with the Foundation to know that the guys will be amnesticized, but we don't have to have a hammy "they do what they must" moment. I think you could just have a note at the end of all the interviews saying "Mossman, Gildson, and Fine were administered amnestics before being reintegrated into society". Something like that.
And how did your prayer result in the escape of SCP-XXXX?
Repeat the note about calling it SCP-XXXX, and also, why would they suddenly assume this? So far they have no reason to believe this prayer led to Charlie's escape. Perhaps "where did you pray", "in Charlie's pen", "so were you there when he escaped?", "yes, I had opened the pen door and left it open while I prayed", something like that. That would be a lot more believable, I think.
He knows whats best for us.
What's, you mean. You missed the apostrophe.
Right after this, there are some spacing issues in your interview. You'll see what I mean, looking back over it. Please to fix those.
A small nitpick:
Geoff Fine attempts to flip the interview table
Versus…
Barney Mossman: [Nods head in confirmation]
Keep the way in which you describe actions consistent.
It is currently not believed that Geoff Fine's worshiping of SCP-XXXX is not due to any anomalous effect […]
Double negative. Nick one of those "not"s.
[…] though all personnel should be psychologically evaluated before testing with SCP-XXXX.
Then why wasn't this in the containment procedures? To make it fit more here, I might replace it with something like:
"[…] though it has been recommended that personnel be psychologically evaluated before and after SCP-XXXX assignment."
Or even:
"[…] as is suggested by a study of personnel showing no abnormal religious or ritual practices after working with SCP-XXXX."
The latter option would show that they did indeed do their research on this one.
[…] any of the claims made.
I'd just say "these claims".
The workers and cows […] were all administrated class E amnestics.
And cows? Pfffft. Not sure if I would change this, I honestly just think that's funny.
The cows taken into Foundation custody and used as food for SCP-XXXX.
Something… is missing from this sentence. It also doesn't seem to make sense, even with a word plugged in. So, I think you mean to have "were" after "cows", so it's "The cows were […]", but also, why amnesticize the cows if you're then going to just take them? Also, why take them? This thing eats more than just other cows.
The Butcher's Block Slaughterhouse was closed under the pretense that the manager and employees were arrested for money laundering.
Why not a health code violation? Earlier they admitted to selling meat before testing whether or not it was toxic. Seems like the Foundation wouldn't even have to stretch to accuse them of a health code violation. Money laundering seems less thematically relevant, as well.
It is still currently unknown how the cow that birthed SCP-XXXX became impregnated.
I don't think the impregnation is the mystery here, I think the mystery is where it came from, as they seem to still have no source on that. I'd change this sentence in accordance.
[…] it is to be immediately transferred to Site 64.
Site-64, ya doof, keep consistent.
Big Picture /Conceptual Critique
Well firstly I don't think you need a second instance to appear. I mean, unless you really have somewhere you're going with this… you have a plenty long article already, which seems to have a progression and a story, revolving around a pretty interesting and surprisingly unique anomaly (with some killer pictures to boot).Your interviews are honestly pretty good (it's very difficult to get that immaculate characterization that we all strive for, so I'm not knocking you points for not reaching that). Your progression… works. I don't think it's great, but it's not bad either. It's good. I say this, because the ending didn't feel super solid for me.
I, personally, think that article endings are possibly the most important part of the whole article. You need to have a good payoff, a satisfactory end so that your reader leaves it with a feeling of "ahh, yes, that was worth my time, it went to a cool place". Usually, this would come in the form of a big revelation at the end of the article — or else something new, and interesting, that builds off of the previous material.
Here, the interviews don't actually tell us much about the nature of the anomaly (which is fine, your story of them trying many ways to kill the thing was pretty creepy and good), and the last interview tells us only that the owner was sorta worshiping it. While this is weird, and creepy, and neat… we're not really invested in the owner, are we? The readers, we're invested in the cow thing. We wanna know more about the cow thing. The worship bit is a great aside, but I think a strong ending here requires a little more on the cow thing.
As is, we end with how they handled the cover story. Which… like… do we really care? It's good detail, but do we really care enough about how they did the cover story to end on that and feel good about it? I, personally, don't think so.
…Maybe finding a second instance would be good. But I think your article is dragging a bit as is, so we're going to want to make the sheep instance short. I'm thinking, maybe that's all there is, actually. Have an addendum saying that there's an instance that's much more like a sheep and produces sheep meat. And that's all.
That would leave us, the readers, with this sense of "oh, weird, so this isn't an anomalous cow thing, this is an anomalous phenomenon affecting farm animals", or something like that, which would be a good mystery to leave us on. That would be a solid (not amazingly solid, mind you, but a satisfactory) ending to this article.
If you implement all my line-by-line critiques, this will be a soft upvote for me. If you did some conceptual tweaking to make a more satisfactory end, this would be a "feels good" upvote from me. That's about all I have to say, now.
Good luck with this thing!
SCP-XXXX during recovery
Item #: SCP-XXXX
Object Class: Euclid
Special Containment Procedures: SCP-XXXX is to be kept in a 8 meter by 10 meter cell in the medium containment zone of Site-64. The cell is to be fitted with a 5 meter trough on the east wall of the cell. SCP-XXXX is to be sheared of its excess mass and have its cell cleaned once every week. X-rays are to be performed on SCP-XXXX before and after shearing. The resulting meat is to be incinerated. SCP-XXXX is to be fed a diet of raw beef, hay, wood, and bricks. Constant is not necessary, though SCP-XXXX must be checked at a minimum of three times a day. In a scenario where growth can not be regulated the object class is to be reevaluated.
Description: SCP-XXXX a bovine-esque creature measuring 3.4 meters tall and 5 meters long at the time of writing. Its skin is thin, appearing translucent and ripping easily. SCP-XXXX is partially blind and has a bulbous head that lacks the features of a bovine of which it shares an alleged lineage. SCP-XXXX is sentient and docile, not acknowledging personnel during feeding or cleaning of its cell. SCP-XXXX does not produce excrement.
SCP-XXXX is constantly growing in size and weight. As such, excess mass must be sheared off every week. Testing has shown that limiting the diet of SCP-XXXX does not limit its growth. Additional testing has shown that any meat that has been removed from SCP-XXXX does not display the same constant growth. The meat produced by SCP-XXXX is USDA Utility grade beef and has shown no anomalous properties. Despite this, the resulting meat is to be incinerated as a cautionary measure.
When SCP-XXXX is not sheared of its excess mass new features begin to form, including limbs, genitalia, and, in rare cases, organs. The anatomy and placement of exterior growths are seemingly random. At its largest, SCP-XXXX grew to be 8.5 meters tall and 9.8 meters long featuring seven legs, four stomachs, two penises, five testicles, and three tongues before the Foundation disallowed further growth. Testing was halted after SCP-XXXX began showing evidence of neural tissue generation.
SCP-XXXX was found in ████████, ███████ Canada on the morning of December 16th, 2004. Calls to animal control were made by multiple residents about a large cow with mange roaming by Highway 17. Two animal control officers were sent to investigate the reports. Upon discovery of SCP-XXXX, the animal control officers contacted the local police department at 9:39. A Foundation plant contacted Site-64 to send containment specialists to transport it. Class A anestics were administered to the animal control officers and the case was closed, reporting it as being a cow with mange that was put down at the scene.
SCP-XXXX was transported to Site-64 at 12:46 with no resistance from SCP-XXXX. Containment Specialists tracked the origin of SCP-XXXX to a slaughterhouse by the name of Butcher's Block where one employee, Barney Mossman, and the manager, Jeff Fine, were found and taken into Foundation custody. One more employee, Rory Gildson, was later found at his residence at ███ ████ ██████ after calling in sick that day.
All three persons were taken to Site-64 for questioning.
Interview Logs:
Interviewed: Barney Mossman
Interviewer: Dr. Reeves
<Begin Log, December 17, 2004, 14:47>
Interviewer: Your name is Barney Mossman, correct?
Barney Mossman nods his head in confirmation
Interviewer: Let the record show that Mr. Mossman nodded his head in confirmation.
Barney Mossman: Come on man, What am I here for?
Interviewer: Mr. Mossman, I'm sure you've been told, you're in here for questioning about the large bovine creature that allegedly belongs to your employer.
Barney Mossman: You mean Big Charlie?
Interviewer: Is that the name of the bovine or your employer?
Barney Mossman: It's the cow. I didn't choose it, he was already named when I started working there a couple years ago.
Interviewer: So you don't know the origin of it?
Barney Mossman: No, man I don't know anything.
Interviewer: Anything at all?
Barney Mossman: Well I mean, all I know is that we feed it hay, but it also just eats whatever's around it like wood and bricks, and sometimes the other cows.
Interviewer: How long have you had the creature?
Barney Mossman: I don't know, man, I've been working there for about 4 years and they and already had him when I started working there. They told me to never tell anyone about him, but I don't care enough to tell anyone anyway.
Interviewer: Interesting, so why did you keep it alive and not just slaughter it?
Barney Mossman: Fucking beats me, man, I only ever fed the damned thing, they would never tell me.
Interviewer: Alright. Well is there anything else you can tell me?
Barney Mossman: Nope. I barely ever got to see him, I just sometimes shove hay in his pen. He ain't my department, I'm the custodian.
Interviewer: Okay. So where were you when the thing escaped your employer's possession?
Barney Mossman: I was at home, because it was night. I locked it up good but next morning his pen is empty and I've got you fuckers knocking down the door.
Interviewer: Well alright then, Mr. Mossman, I guess if that's all you can tell us then we're done here.
<End Log, December 17, 2004, 15:22>
Interviewed: Rory Gildson
Interviewer: Dr. Reeves
<Begin Log, December 17, 2004, 22:00>
Interviewer: Your name is Rory Gildson, correct?
Rory Gildson: Yeah.
Interviewer: Okay. Let's start the interview.
Rory Gildson: Okay.
Interviewer: So what can you tell me about the cow?
Rory Gildson: Well what do you want to know?
Interviewer: Let's start at the beginning; where did the cow come from and how did he come into your possession?
Rory Gildson: We bought a pregnant cow from someone, like two for the price of one, and one day the calf just fell out of the mama cow. Like just ripped through its chest. It didn't have an umbilical cord and it wasn't moving so we thought it was dead. It also looked fucking disgusting. We hauled it out but the next morning it had at some point woken up and tried to get in the barn. We thought "this little guy is fucked, maybe someone will want to buy him for some scientific study or freak show," so we took it inside and posted an ad in the local papers—
Interviewer: Wait, an ad about selling the creature?
Rory Gildson: Yes.
- Editor's Note: The ad was replaced successfully
Interviewer: Okay, continue.
Rory Gildson: What?
Interviewer: Nothing, just continue.
Rory Gildson: Alright. Well we placed the ad but nobody would bite so we decided that it was just a waste to keep it, and it probably wouldn't be a good idea to release it into the wild, as that could fuck up the ecosystem or something, so we decided to finally put it out of it's misery. So we got the cattle gun and we placed it right between its beady fucking eyes and pulled the trigger. There was a "thunk" sound but nothing happened.
Interviewer: And you're sure the gun wasn't compromised in any way?
Rory Gildson: Yeah. And when we tried it again but it just ended up shattering the gun. So we decided to try slitting its throat and leaving it there but it barely bled. So next we tried just completely cutting out it's throat but it still didn't seem to affect him at all. We decided to try and butcher it right there where it stood but it didn't even react. When we were done he was practically a skeleton. We realized that we could try just selling the meat.
Interviewer: How did you know that the meat wasn't toxic or something?
Rory Gildson: We didn't. But it's because we just wanted to make something out of our purchase. A couple days later we realized that he had grown back most of what we cut off him. We then tried feeding it to Barney and he didn't even notice it tasting different. It was like our miracle cow. One cow that just eats anything in front of it and produces infinite meat. Of course we still have other cows but they don't like Big Charlie. If they get too close and Charlie gets too hungry, he'll eat them, but we don't really care, he'll produce enough meat to cover both of them.
Interviewer: Fascinating. Is there anything else you can tell me?
Rory Gildson: He's sterile.
Interviewer: Okay. Is there anything else?
Rory Gildson: Well not really, that's all there is to say.
Interviewer: Do you have any idea how it escaped your possession?
Rory Gildson: What? No, I was sick at home. I have no idea.
Interviewer: Alright then. Thank you for cooperating, I believe we're done here.
<End Log, December 17, 2004, 24:29>
Interviewed: Jeff Fine
Interviewer: Dr. Reeves
<Begin Log, December 18, 2004, 00:15>
Interviewer: You are Jeff Fine, is that correct?
Jeff Fine: Yes. It is.
Interviewer: And you are the owner of the Butcher's Block slaughterhouse?
Jeff Fine: Yes.
Interviewer: The business that your employees claim housed and fed the bovine creaute?
Jeff Fine: Yes.
Interviewer: Can you tell us more about that?
Jeff Fine: I bought a pregnant cow from some guy. Eventually it gave birth. And that was Big Charlie.
Interviewer: I know about the birth and the way you would shear the flesh off of it. Is there anything else you could tell me?
Jeff Fine: We tried to sell it thinking someone ought to want it to study or something but nobody would touch him. I told the boys to put him down but the cattle gun wouldn't even crack his skull. So they tried just cutting him up where he stood. The next couple of days while we were waiting for him to die we noticed that he had regrown himself so we decided to accept this blessing.
Interviewer: How long have you been selling the meat?
Jeff Fine: 9 years, for as long as he's been alive.
Interviewer: It's 9 years old?
Jeff Fine: Yep.
Interviewer: Okay. Okay, what were you doing on the night of December 12th 2004 when the creature escaped?
Jeff Fine: I was praying.
Interviewer: To who, when, and where?
Jeff Fine: Why do you need to know?
Interviewer: Mr. Fine, answer the question.
Jeff Fine: To Big Charlie.
Interviewer: Oh?
Jeff Fine: I've done it every night since we received him.
Interviewer: And why is that?
Jeff Fine: You heard what they said! He feels no pain, you can't kill him, he provides for us! He is our savior!
Interviewer: How would you pray to him?
Jeff Fine: Well I would open his pen, kneel down in front of him and ask to receive his blessings.
Interviewer: And so this time it ran past you and escaped?
Jeff Fine: Yes.
Interviewer: Had he ever shown signs of that kind of behavior before?
Jeff Fine: No, not at all. I don't know why he would do that but it has to be for a reason.
Interviewer: And has this prayer to it ever worked for you?
Jeff Fine: Big Charlie doesn't just answer all prayers, willy-nilly. He knows what's best for us.
Interviewer: So that's a no?
Jeff Fine: I'm done here! I don't need to keep answering questions like this!
Interviewer: Hey, we're not done here until I say so. Sit back down.Jeff Fine: Let me out! I need to see Big Charlie! I need to see if he's safe!
Interviewer: Mr. Fine, sit down!
Jeff Fine attempts to flip the interview table
Jeff Fine is tranquilized by the security guard on duty
Interviewer: God dammit. We're done here<End Log, December 18, 2004, 01:34>
It is currently not believed that Jeff Fine's worshiping of SCP-XXXX is due to any anomalous effect, as is suggested by a study of personnel showing no abnormal religious or ritual practices after working with SCP-XXXX.
At this time there seems to be no reason to discredit any of the claims made. The workers and cows that were in the possession of the Butcher's Block Slaughterhouse at the time were all administrated class E amnestics. The Butcher's Block Slaughterhouse was closed under the pretense that it was due to a health code violation and the employees were arrested for malpractice.
The identity of man that sold Jeff Fine the pregnant that birthed SCP-XXXX is still unknown.
