2015 Community Survey Results

Finally, here are the results of the 2015 Community Survey! As with last year, these results are not scientific, but hopefully give a somewhat representative picture of the community.

Stat-wise, we had around 600 fewer respondents this year, which represents about a 15.6% decrease from last year.

I want to thank everyone who took the time to respond; we appreciate the feedback, good, bad, and neutral, and will try to take it into account in the future.

And now, on to the results!

What is your gender?

Results – hide block Gender # of people % of responses Male 2461 77.22% Female 463 14.53% Other 165 5.18% Prefer not to say 98 3.07% Total 3187 More people answered "other" and "prefer not to say" compared to last year, and the overall percentages of "female", "other", and "prefer not to say" all went up compared to last year.

What is your age?

Results – hide block Age range # of people % of responses Under 15 317 9.95% 15-19 1656 51.96% 20-24 713 22.37% 25-29 264 8.28% 30-34 118 3.70% 35-39 57 1.79% 40-44 25 0.78% 45-49 10 0.31% 50-54 11 0.35% 55-59 1 0.03% 60+ 15 0.47% Total 3187 We skewed slightly younger this year, compared to last, with the percentage of people under 25 increasing by 3.67%.

What is your primary language?

Results – hide block Total number of languages does not match the total number of respondents because people who reported being multilingual had their languages added separately. Alphabetical Order

By Percentage Language # of people % of responses Afrikaans 2 0.06% American Sign Language 2 0.06% Arabic 7 0.21% Armenian 5 0.15% Bahasa Indonesia 5 0.15% Bulgarian 7 0.21% Catalan 6 0.18% Chinese (Cantonese) 18 0.54% Chinese (Mandarin) 37 1.11% Chinese (other dialect) 3 0.09% Croatian 7 0.21% Czech 7 0.21% Danish 16 0.48% Dutch 25 0.75% English 2343 70.40% Estonian 5 0.15% Filipino 11 0.33% Finnish 16 0.48% French 124 3.73% Galician 1 0.03% Georgian 1 0.03% German 73 2.19% Goji 1 0.03% Greek 5 0.15% Hawai'ian 1 0.03% Hebrew 6 0.18% Hiligaynon 1 0.03% Hindi 1 0.03% Hungarian 11 0.33% Irish Gaelic 1 0.03% isiXhosa 1 0.03% Italian 28 0.84% Japanese 101 3.03% Korean 90 2.70% Latvian 4 0.12% Lithuanian 6 0.18% Malay 3 0.09% Marathi 2 0.06% Norwegian 12 0.36% Polish 28 0.84% Portuguese 54 1.62% Romanian 11 0.33% Russian 31 0.93% Sami 1 0.03% Serbian 4 0.12% Slovak 3 0.09% Slovene 2 0.06% Spanish 148 4.45% Swedish 28 0.84% Tagalog 4 0.12% Thai 2 0.06% Turkish 10 0.30% Ukrainian 3 0.09% Urdu 1 0.03% Valencian 1 0.03% Vietnamese 5 0.15% Welsh 1 0.03% Total 3332 Language # of people % of responses English 2343 70.40% Spanish 148 4.45% French 124 3.73% Japanese 101 3.03% Korean 90 2.70% German 73 2.19% Portuguese 54 1.62% Chinese (Mandarin) 37 1.11% Russian 31 0.93% Italian 28 0.84% Polish 28 0.84% Swedish 28 0.84% Dutch 25 0.75% Chinese (Cantonese) 18 0.54% Danish 16 0.48% Finnish 16 0.48% Norwegian 12 0.36% Filipino 11 0.33% Hungarian 11 0.33% Romanian 11 0.33% Turkish 10 0.30% Arabic 7 0.21% Bulgarian 7 0.21% Croatian 7 0.21% Czech 7 0.21% Catalan 6 0.18% Hebrew 6 0.18% Lithuanian 6 0.18% Armenian 5 0.15% Bahasa Indonesia 5 0.15% Estonian 5 0.15% Greek 5 0.15% Vietnamese 5 0.15% Latvian 4 0.12% Serbian 4 0.12% Tagalog 4 0.12% Chinese (other dialect) 3 0.09% Malay 3 0.09% Slovak 3 0.09% Ukrainian 3 0.09% Afrikaans 2 0.06% American Sign Language 2 0.06% Marathi 2 0.06% Slovene 2 0.06% Thai 2 0.06% Galician 1 0.03% Georgian 1 0.03% Goji 1 0.03% Hawai'ian 1 0.03% Hiligaynon 1 0.03% Hindi 1 0.03% Irish Gaelic 1 0.03% isiXhosa 1 0.03% Sami 1 0.03% Urdu 1 0.03% Valencian 1 0.03% Welsh 1 0.03% Total 3332 There were a number of new languages on the list this year, including American Sign Language, Catalan, Galician, Goji, Hawai'ian, Hiligaynon, isiXhosa, Sami, Ukrainian, Urdu, Valencian, and Welsh.

What country do you live in?

Results – hide block The total number of responses doesn't match the total number of respondents because I tossed the joke ones. The ones that were borderline have been kept. Alphabetical Order

By Percentage Name # of people % of respondents Algeria 1 0.03% Antarctica 1 0.03% Argentina 26 0.82% Armenia 1 0.03% Australia 85 2.67% Austria 7 0.22% Belarus 3 0.09% Belgium 10 0.31% Bolivia 5 0.16% Brazil 48 1.51% Bulgaria 4 0.13% Canada 181 5.69% Chile 21 0.66% China 34 1.07% Colombia 9 0.28% Costa Rica 3 0.09% Croatia 6 0.19% Czech Republic 12 0.38% Denmark 17 0.53% Ecuador 3 0.09% Egypt 1 0.03% El Salvador 2 0.06% Estonia 1 0.03% Finland 15 0.47% France 94 2.96% Germany 52 1.63% Greece 4 0.13% Grenada 1 0.03% Honduras 1 0.03% Hong Kong 8 0.25% Hungary 8 0.25% Île de la Réunion 1 0.03% India 3 0.09% Indonesia 10 0.31% Iraq 2 0.06% Ireland

(Republic of Ireland) 16 0.53% Israel 6 0.19% Italy 27 0.85% Jamaica 1 0.03% Japan 90 2.83% Latvia 5 0.16% Lebanon 1 0.03% Lithuania 6 0.19% Malaysia 6 0.19% Malta 1 0.03% Mexico 34 1.07% Molossia 1 0.03% Morocco 1 0.03% Netherlands 24 0.75% New Zealand 21 0.66% Nigeria 1 0.03% Norway 13 0.41% Pakistan 2 0.06% Peru 10 0.31% Phillipines 25 0.79% Poland 23 0.72% Portugal 11 0.35% Puerto Rico 5 0.16% Qatar 1 0.03% Romania 13 0.41% Russia 12 0.38% Saint Vincent and

the Grenadines 1 0.03% Sealand 1 0.03% Serbia 5 0.16% Singapore 10 0.31% Slovakia 3 0.09% Slovenia 2 0.06% South Africa 6 0.19% South Korea 83 2.61% Spain 34 1.07% Sweden 26 0.82% Switzerland 6 0.19% Taiwan 4 0.13% Thailand 3 0.09% Turkey 8 0.25% Ukraine 5 0.16% United Kingdom 205 6.41% United States of America 1730 54.39% Venezuela 8 0.25% Vietnam 4 0.13% Zimbabwe 1 0.03% Total 3181 Name # of people % of respondents United States of America 1730 54.39% United Kingdom 205 6.41% Canada 181 5.69% France 94 2.96% Japan 90 2.83% Australia 85 2.67% South Korea 83 2.61% Germany 52 1.63% Brazil 48 1.51% China 34 1.07% Mexico 34 1.07% Spain 34 1.07% Italy 27 0.85% Argentina 26 0.82% Sweden 26 0.82% Phillipines 25 0.79% Netherlands 24 0.75% Poland 23 0.72% Chile 21 0.66% New Zealand 21 0.66% Denmark 17 0.53% Ireland 16 0.53% Finland 15 0.47% Norway 13 0.41% Romania 13 0.41% Czech Republic 12 0.38% Russia 12 0.38% Portugal 11 0.35% Belgium 10 0.31% Indonesia 10 0.31% Peru 10 0.31% Singapore 10 0.31% Colombia 9 0.28% Hong Kong 8 0.25% Hungary 8 0.25% Turkey 8 0.25% Venezuela 8 0.25% Austria 7 0.22% Croatia 6 0.19% Israel 6 0.19% Lithuania 6 0.19% Malaysia 6 0.19% South Africa 6 0.19% Switzerland 6 0.19% Bolivia 5 0.16% Latvia 5 0.16% Puerto Rico 5 0.16% Serbia 5 0.16% Ukraine 5 0.16% Bulgaria 4 0.13% Greece 4 0.13% Taiwan 4 0.13% Vietnam 4 0.13% Belarus 3 0.09% Costa Rica 3 0.09% Ecuador 3 0.09% India 3 0.09% Slovakia 3 0.09% Thailand 3 0.09% El Salvador 2 0.06% Iraq 2 0.06% Pakistan 2 0.06% Slovenia 2 0.06% Algeria 1 0.03% Antarctica 1 0.03% Armenia 1 0.03% Egypt 1 0.03% Estonia 1 0.03% Grenada 1 0.03% Honduras 1 0.03% Île de la Réunion 1 0.03% Jamaica 1 0.03% Lebanon 1 0.03% Malta 1 0.03% Molossia 1 0.03% Morocco 1 0.03% Nigeria 1 0.03% Qatar 1 0.03% Saint Vincent and

the Grenadines 1 0.03% Sealand 1 0.03% Zimbabwe 1 0.03% Total 3181

How did you first discover the SCP Foundation?

Results – hide block Method # of People /x/ or another image board 154 one of the SCP games 854 TV Tropes 196 Referred by someone you know 529 Reddit 119 Facebook 31 Twitter 15 Tumblr 53 Saw fanart or fanfic elsewhere 94 Creepypasta site or blog 329 Youtube 235 SCPReadings on Youtube 5 Tats Top Videos on Youtube 4 Markiplier on Youtube 41 Google/unrelated search 22 Wikipedia 9 Yogpod/Yogcast 5 Rigveda 8 NicoNico 4 webcomic 7 Livejournal 2 Cracked.com 5 Imgur 2 Something Awful 8 gaming website 7 searching for creepypasta 7 DeviantArt 3 meme site 5 sticker in real life 4 reference in another game or mod 22 Facepunch 4 Stumbleupon 6 other 90 Don't remember 53 Total 2932

Which of the following do you read, follow, or use?

Which of the following do you do?

Results – hide block # of respondents Read articles on the main wiki 2765 Vote &/or comment on the main wiki 694 Read articles on one of the non-English wikis 363 Write for any of the wikis 362 Translate articles for a non-English wiki 120 Draw fanart 261 Write fanfic not posted on the main wiki 153 Create other fanwork (games, videos, music, etc.) 160 Participate on one of the official roleplay sites 97 Roleplay on another site (Twitter, Tumblr, etc.) 169 Total responses 2924 Despite the lower overall numbers, we had just as many people saying that they vote &/or comment on the English wiki, and MORE people say they write for one of the wikis. All the fanwork numbers were up, even if only slightly. And while the number of participants in the official roleplays was slightly down, the number of people roleplaying on other site was up by over 60 people.

What do you think about the wiki's Staff (not the in-universe Senior Staff/author avatars) and the job they're doing, individually or as a whole?

Results – hide block Given that these were free-form answers and people were able to give detailed responses, we can't provide a full breakdown. That said, the responses generally fell into the following categories: Approve of Staff 841 Approve with some reservations 38 Neutral/Don’t know/Not Sure/No opinion/No answer 121 Do not approve 27 Non-answer/Unclear 42 People tended to like Zyn a lot. Congrats on winning Miss Congeniality, Zyn! :) There were frequent favorable comparisons to the staff on other sites, several specifically favorably comparing us to reddit moderators. I'm not sure whether they meant reddit moderators in general or the mods of the /r/SCP reddit, most of whom also hold/held wiki Staff positions. Most of the reasonable disapprovals wanted more help with feedback and facilitation for better writing. Aside from English, we had responses in French, Spanish, Japanese, and Korean. Many people wish for more frequent contests. We're trying to get out at least 2 a year, with a preference for quarterly. We wouldn't really be able to do them more frequently, given the amount of time any one contest needs. Finally, in no particular order, here are some responses that we found amusing: How much does this job pay? I have a buddy of mine who would probably be interested if you're hiring. (Drewbear note: Dude, I wish we got paid for this.)

I imagine they are sexy

eHvery single member of sEtaff is a glorious and shiniLng wonder and an exPample to us all. I amM not undEer duress, and I am not being mistreated.

Troy's power will be mine. (Drewbear note: No it won't. He is eternal.)

Individually, there is a host of staff that I like and even respect. As a whole, it is a despicable organization I wouldn't let manage the pet rock shelf I don't have.

SATAN IS BETTER (Drewbear note: Possibly, but we have fresh-baked cookies.)

I want to lick TroyL's forehead. (Drewbear note: Are you sure? You don't know where that forehead has been.)

I welcome our nonbinary pansexual dreadlords.

I've seen some of the discussion threads on 05, and I think you guys like to extend your arguments way too much. You build these walls of text, carefully constructing some grand, all-encompassing Point, which is then picked apart by everybody and their senpai. If something needs to be said, then sure, take your time saying it, but so often I see these threads ended by someone pointing out something obvious that everyone else missed while they were pontificating. (Drewbear note: Not gonna lie, we do have a tendency for that.)

SPINELESS LIBERALS (Drewbear note: Hey! I will have you know that I have several spines in my collection!)

Where the fuck is the Administrator? (Drewbear note: He retired to a nice farm upstate where he can run and play to his heart's content.)

Do you have any thoughts or concerns about the direction the wiki is taking?

Results – hide block Again, these free-form answers had too much detail to go into here, but the summary categories were: No concerns/Positive Appraisal 850 More featuring/contests 4 Concerns over writing quality/seriousness 65 Less liberal 2 More liberal 1 Thanks for accepting genders 2 Non-answers 44 No comment 18 Comments on wiki activity 16 More short SCPs 1 More Horror 23 Dislike Roleplaying 1 Staff Elitism/Staff Attitudes 10 More meta projects 2 More off-site activities and projects 2 Too much fanart 1 There were a lot of comments about Project Resurrection (37 mentions), both good and bad. There was the frequent sentiment for the wiki to return to "how it used to feel" usually accompanying Series III or Horror responses. To which, all I can say is that the site's culture and tastes have evolved since Series I. This is not saying that one was better than the other, just that the tastes have changed. There was also a lot of worrying about running out of original ideas, and difficulty finding SCPs since the series are so numerous now. I can understand that difficulty and sympathize, since I have some difficulty thinking up original ideas as well. All I can say is that it stretches your creative muscles to find something new. As for finding specific SCPs in the mainlist, you can either use the Tag Search page (thanks, Crayne!) or use Wikidot's search function at the top of each page. Finally, you can hop into chat (if possible) and see if anyone can help you out. The hivemind is usually pretty good at pulling up specific SCPs.

If you could change ONE thing about the wiki, what would it be?

Results – hide block Items in red are things that we can't really change/fix/improve, as they're based on limitations cooked into Wikidot's architecture. Sorry. Items in blue are technical or design concerns. Some of these we're already aware of and working on behind the scenes. Some are things that we've already come up with workarounds in the form of usertools. Some are things that aren't going to change any time soon (putting all images under collapsibles, for example). Items in green are specifically related to Staff and Staff interactions or duties. Items in orange concern writing content or standards, which is largely dependent on the authors and commenters on the wiki. We (Staff) have some influence on that, but not a lot. Items in normal text color don't easily fit into one of the other categories. Faster random page 15 Night mode EDIT 9/22/15: I was wrong! A night mode

workaround has been made and instructions on how to

install/activate it are here. 10 "Recommended for you" page 1 Limit upload rate per author 1 Less "obvious" ads 5 Way to mark read articles 8 Most recently top rated/Trending 7 Better search function 20 Actually display "neutral votes" 1 Way to search submissions chronologically (beyond most recent) 1 Way to "favorite" something 4 Make color scheme less white/bright 28 More official look/More immersion 33 "Better layout" or "newer design" 22 Less meta/immersion on main page 2 Tag articles better 7 SCP nickname on the article page 25 Make guides more prominent/easier to see 7 Make tales easier to find/navigate 6 Easier offline reading 2 Way to find what stories a scp/character has been in 7 Get off wikidot 24 Next/previous thing on articles 9 Easier IRC access 3 Better mobile site 14 Requests for a mobile site 21 Make images collapsible 5 More News updates 5 Complete overhaul of administration-tier staff 1 Claimed admins had been rude to them 1 Featured article/tale should change more often 20 The way that the staff immediately CLOSED - STAFF POST

nearly every discussion that is even slightly controversial before

it begins to even threaten to be disrespectful, offensive,

et cetera. I wouldn't just change that - I would drastically reform it. 1 Cleanup old articles

(with a few specifically mentioning Heritage Collection) 9 The evaluation for becoming staff 1 Update heritage collection 3 Make joining easier 23 Make it harder to join 2 Make joining faster 2 Link to fan stuff 9 Merchandise 6 Lower age limit 3 Raise age limit 2 More contests 5 Staff are too intimidating 4 More love for translated objects/sites

(3 requests for a German site) 23 Less world destroying skips 2 Higher standards 6 More wikiwalking 1 Better justification for downvotes 2 Help newer writers more 7 Less/remove blackbox/expunge/redaction 9 More pictures 34 More content on the canons 3 More horror 7 More tales/Focus on tales 7 More audio/video/multimedia stuff 6 More experiments/collab logs 10 More cross tests 5 More info on guards/personnel 2 Less elitism/Less harsh critique 15 More people gave critique/Critique team to be more active 7 Remove Author Avatars 2 Preliminary screening on articles prior to "public" posting 11 Nothing 255 Summary of skips 7 Info on characters 2 Timelines 4 More detailed (in universe) Sites list 1 "Base" canon 5 Older members get away with more 3 Trigger warnings on article content 3

Special thanks to Roget and TwistedGears, who went above and beyond to help sort through the free-form answers.