User:Buginajar/Operant conditioning chamber/CourteneyD1999 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Buginajar


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Buginajar/Operant_conditioning_chamber?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Operant conditioning chamber

Evaluate the drafted changes
I think everything you have planned to contribute is excellent and beneficial to the article. Adding more pictures is always helpful, but may I also suggest throwing in a few links to different terms you may come across. It's a super easy way to contribute to an article without actually doing much lol. I agree the structure section is well written and you can't go wrong with adding a reference. I think it is a bit odd that there is not a reference in the entire section. If you cannot find another article or anything sufficient to support the social media claims in the commercial applications section, then I also agree that it should not be included, but because it is someone else's work, I would advise mentioning it on the article's talk page to get the opinion of experts.

Everything was supported in a neutral tone. I would suggest going over before publishing to look for grammatical errors like capitalizing Skinner and anything else you may have accidentally missed (don't worry, it happens). I was able to cite my references in my sandbox and when I added a reference, I just used the doi and it generated my reference for me. I'm a little confused because some of my references were references in the original article, so the numbering of the references in my sandbox may be off, but I'm sure it will be figured out whenever we officially publish. I just thought you might find it somewhat helpful.

All the best! ~CourteneyD1999