Board Thread:Writer's Workshop/@comment-28862560-20160627172357/@comment-24101790-20160627180124

There are quite a few issues here. The most notable are the capitalization, wording, run-on sentences, and the story issues. Additionally, a number of paragraphs need to be broken up as they are blocky/wall-of-texts. A typical paragraph is five-ten sentences long. Any longer and it's a pain to read, any less and it feels like you're stretching/padding the story.

Capitalization: "5 climbers from china (China) decided", "The Pashto in English roughly translated to “yes I’m coming”.", "“he took it well”", etc. Remember if you are quoting a complete sentence, it should be properly capitalized. You only leave it uncapitalized if you are paraphrasing it or just giving the gist of what's said.

Wording issues: "Taking them out and examining them closely revealed that the feet were already present in the boots" This needs some re-wording as it's pretty awkward. "still present in the boots" is a better phrase. "they had obviously been amputated, someone or something or some event had caused this.", as those are the only possibilities for anything to happen, this really feels redundant. If the feet have been removed, those are the only options (a person did it, an animal/creature did it, an event caused it). "a room which was dirty and had blood splats everywhere" I think you mean splatter, a splat is a piece of thin wood in the center of a chair back. There are other instances of awkward/incorrect word usage throughout the story. I would strongly suggest reading this aloud to yourself to catch those instances.

Overly complex/run-on sentences: "The video is mostly of the person going around inside the cabin rummaging through stuff present there, this one was also just a minute long with the last 15 seconds focused on a piece of equipment on a table which appeared to be some sort of communication equipment, the person who was recording the video took the walkie talkie in his hands for a moment and appeared to be willing to answer it but puts it back again.", "The bound and gagged man falls from the chair trying very hard to scream out of his gag while he bleeds from his stomach, the video continues with the man struggling on the floor in front of the camera, after about 2 minutes of this the man with the knife comes near the camera to shut it down and that’s where the video ends.", "The video showed a recording of an empty room while an argument could be heard in the distance between two men in Pashto, the men can’t be seen but their voices can be heard, both of them appear to be angry at each other for some reason, as the conversation goes on their voices become louder, they appear to be arguing over money problems but it still wasn’t clear as to what exactly they were having this feud over.", etc.

Story issues: Here's what really tipped the scales and resulted in the story's deletion as there were quite a lot of plot problems here. "Many people speculated that it could be a violent storm but the nature of the damage suggested “breaking and entering”." As it's a camp site, this needs to be explained in more detail. Signs of a house break-in are evident but here you suggest that there were wild animals present at the scene and there was no bullets to suggest an attack. You really need to describe what led investigators to believe this event was connected to a crime as it currently feels like a stretch without any evidence/description to support their theory.

Story issues cont.: "Two days later another video was uploaded to the YouTube channel, the subscribers and video views had barely gotten more by now, in fact the channel seems to have lost some subscribers as well while this new video barely had more than 30 views." while the clinical approach works in most parts, it feels odd to keep referencing the view count and subscribers, especially since it doesn't really weigh too heavily on the story or advance the plot any. It comes off as a bit of description that doesn't advance the story any and actually diverts attention from the plot.

Story issues end: "The man would later admit that he killed people and sold their organs to another man for money, this other man’s identity he can’t (couldn't) remember for some reason." This needs some re-working. As the killer had obviously been working with someone to abduct and harvest organs for a while, it seems odd that he'd forget the other person and police likely would press him for information.

Conclusion: While there are some things the story does well, I really feel like the issues that are present really bring down the story as a whole. I would suggest spending some time to correct the errors and re-write portions/clarify some things before making a deletion appeal.