Talk:SCP-173

I saw quite a few other sources that would be worth taking a look at, but I couldn't access them due to them being paywalled and neither having the funds nor academic place to access them. Can people with the ability to access them add them on? (assuming they add any new information or are additional sources for existing ones.)

BTW, would it be required as an author of the SCP wiki (admittedly one that only has a single tale, surrounding an irrelevant character) that I disclose this as a COI? The page for that is rather ambiguous as to whether users of creative spaces would qualify as a COI or SME, so I'm just asking in advance for clarification. ThyCheshireCat (talk) 19:59, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Replying to clarify that the sources have been obtained, though the other question remains. ThyCheshireCat (talk) 07:24, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi @ThyCheshireCat! I don't think being a minor author on the site gives you a COI any more than watching a TV series or writing fan fic about it gives you a COI for articles about that TV series. You obviously shouldn't write about your own writing, but the SCP wiki is so big I don't think this is an issue at all. Wikipedia:Conflict of interest rules are mostly aimed at businesses promoting themselves - I had no idea how big a problem this is until I started reviewing Articles for Creation and doing New Page Review. Please don't write an article about yourself or your best friend or the company you just started. Or if you must, submit it here as an AfC draft for review. Also, I'm glad you found the sources! Thanks for contributing! Lijil (talk) 15:15, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

I see. There's not much to worry about in that case then, unless by some miracle one of my works becomes the next 3008 lol. If I make a game or start a Youtube channel then things would be different though I assume. (Though I assume in the former case, it could be argued that only the game itself and/or the specific elements from the medium that it's inspired by would qualify?)

Thanks for clarifying! ThyCheshireCat (talk) 20:33, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

I think you're safe to keep contributing to Wikipedia articles about SCP, just don't write about things you actually made yourself! And listen to your gut, if things start to feel a bit iffy maybe they are. But being an expert on a topic certainly doesn't count as WP:COI - we love experts here :) Lijil (talk) 10:09, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

I can understand using a different image that is actually able to show 173, but the replacement has it take up only a miniscule portion of the image itself, and there's no sources for SCP Unity in the article, which could lead to people being confused. (Albeit this could easily be fixed by finding sources to create a section on the Unity game.)

I'd suggest cropping the image, or taking a different one, so that the anomaly is easily visible. (Oh, also, I said this on the talk for the image itself but the original filesize for the Untitled 2004 on the article is way too large to be a low resolution copy, and probably doesn't meet WP:NFCCP. Probably best replaced or removed.) ThyCheshireCat (talk) 12:01, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• ... that SCP-173 no longer looks like a peanut?

• • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Xiao (Genshin Impact)
  • Comment: QPQ 2: Template:Did you know nominations/Bull Believer

ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 21:42, 4 March 2026 (UTC).

• Not a review, but my citation highlighting scripts are picking up one Sportskeeda, which is designated as generally unreliable. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:54, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

  @TechnoSquirrel69: Thanks for catching that, I've removed the Sportskeeda source. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 03:06, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Overall: Article was nominated for DYK within 7 days of moving into mainspace. Article is more than 1,500 words in length, sourced, and neutral. Hook is interesting and sourced. Earwig picked up an unlikely copyright violation of 2.9%, which is mostly attributed a line about the chamber being needed to clean on a bi-weekly basis. The line is sourced, though. 2 QPQs are done. Currently, this DYK looks great aside from some sources I have questions about. Namely, what makes DreadXP a reliable source? lullabying (talk) 23:45, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

• @Lullabying: Dread XP is considered reliable as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources#Subject/Genre-specific. It's the fourth listed alphabetically. (Also I'm not sure if this was actually intended to notify me. I started the 173 article, but I wasn't the one to actually nominate it. Either way though I'm still more than willing to clarify on whatever needs to be... also first time commenting on a DYK nomination, so I hope this is formatted correctly.) ThyCheshireCat (talk) 00:26, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Wow! That's my bad for not looking too clearly. Good to go, then! lullabying (talk) 00:36, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
    • Not seeing the hook fact im the article ArtemisiaGentileschiFan? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:51, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

      @AirshipJungleman29: The article states that the former depiction of the statue, based on Untitled 2004, was affectionately called "Peanut" for its appearance, and that that depiction is no longer used. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 16:32, 12 March 2026 (UTC)