User talk:DM8844/sandbox2

Do NOT try to move this back into mainspace without my permission. It is not ready and does not have sufficient or appropriate sources. MMBiology (talk) 03:47, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Secondary Review
Hello! I really like this article. You did a great job highlighting what a vertebrate system is. I wish I could get a little more information about what is it he contributed to neuroscience. Maybe you should describe the neurological pathway he researched in conditioning or explain the conclusions of his research. Also it's really little but I would take out the "wanted"'s in the goals of research so it reads smoother. Great article! Abbey-MU (talk) 16:40, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Secondary review
The article overall was great. I think you did great explaining his experience with his research project. It was easy to follow his steps throughout his research and the way he was able to learn more about the vertebrate model system. One suggestion I would make is to add images if you are able to, I know sometimes there isn’t much due to copyright. I would also suggest adding why he was influenced on studying the vertebrate model system and working with pigeons. You do say he had worked with pigeons before, so maybe adding some detail on that if there is any. Overall the flow of this article was easy to flow and understand, nice work. --MULuna (talk) 22:04, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Secondary Review
I think the article is very good. I liked how you included the positions he held and his awards. I think the article is easy to follow but I do have some suggestions. I believe that you can add more information about what experiments Cohan used to do with pigeons before working at Western Reserve Medical School. You can also add pictures, it doesn’t need to be pictures of him. You can add pictures portraying his research or pictures from his the university where he got his education. Overall really good job. Zitro2605 (talk) 22:09, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Primary Review
Overall, I think this a good article. I think you did a good job at summarizing what he did, especially in regards to his research. Here are my notes on the standards for a good article. Well written - yes, I think your article flowed nicely and was well written overall. Verifiable with no original research - yes Broad in coverage - I think the topics you covered were good. A suggestion I have is that you could included some of the broader things in his biography and then use the research you discussed in another section specifically about research. I think this would make the article flow better and be more organized with the addition of that heading. I think it is hard to include his research in the biography section when it is supposed to be broad. Neutral - yes, this article is written from a neutral stand point. Illustrated - You could add an image about the nervous system of a bird/pigeon. You could also possibly add a scheme picture of conditioning. Although, I understand that there were some difficulties associated with uploading pictures.

Evaluating Citations Johnson, Bruce (November 2007), "http://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p27481/pdf/ch0910.pdf", Talking and Listening in the Age of Modernity: Essays on the history of sound, ANU Press, ISBN 978-1-921313-47-9, retrieved 2020-04-08

This is a secondary source as defined by wikipedia but this article doesn't seem to be about his study or conditioning, where it is cited in your article.