Talk:(Escape response)

Untitled

Clc352 (talk) 19:04, 21 October 2017 (UTC)Hello ce1734! I personally find your chosen topic very interesting. I have one question however, when giving examples of escape responses will you be looking at mammals as a whole or listing examples of individual species? I only inquire this because the escape responses in different types of mammals (or insects/birds) ought to differ. Clc352 (talk) 19:04, 21 October 2017 (UTC)It might be interesting to include a section that talks about the influence of environmental and genetic factors on escape responses- maybe some changes that might promote or demote escape response behaviour? Clc352 (talk) 19:04, 21 October 2017 (UTC)I really like your idea to include a neurobiology subheader, that's something that I never thought of at all! Clc352 (talk) 19:04, 21 October 2017 (UTC)I'm slightly confused about the experimental importance section. It's interesting, however what will you be discussing? Will this be examples of experiments that study escape response, or will it be discussing why it should be studied? This section might be biased if you solely discuss why it is important to study escape response, so I would lean more towards proviing examples of past research surrounding escape responses/major contributions made to science. Clc352 (talk) 19:04, 21 October 2017 (UTC)All in all, great outline with a solid start!!

Thank you! I took many of your suggestions into account when re-drafting my article. I will now be incorporating more individual examples (species, etc) of escape responses rather than drafting them into one large category. Furthermore, I have changed the "Experimental Importance" section to a section about learning where I will instead talk about how an animal can learn an escape response and how this has been tested in the lab. Ce1734 (talk) 23:26, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Cassandra's Peer Review

Hi Ce1734! I'd like to begin by commending you on the excellent lay out proposed for the article escape response. The outline is well thought out and definitely covers a lot of the ground work required for a successful Wikipedia article. I think that it is great that you will be incorporating what is already in the article. This ensures that the people who have worked on it in the past will not feel as if their work was un-important - this is a good way to keep everyone happy and to recognize their contributions to Wikipedia. While you have many exciting categories to work on, I would like to suggest that you incorporate a category that involves the process of learning in the escape response. This will ensure there is no bias towards the biological side of this behaviour as well as providing the readers of Wikipedia an understanding of both the importance of biology and learning. Finally, it is also great to see so many options provided for your references. This is great to see especially because there were no references present in the stub to begin with. Again, I would like to commend you for a job well done on your plan for this article stub! I look forward to seeing the contributions you make! Cdc832 (talk) 20:10, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions! I took your suggestion about adding a "learning" component to the article, and I think it was a great suggestion. Ce1734 (talk) 23:26, 30 October 2017 (UTC)