Writing scientific reviews is a separate branch of writing skills that requires the author not only to penetrate deep into the scientific problem, but also to quickly find and analyze information, to critically generalize materials from different sources, to pay great attention to their importance and novelty, and also to present complex and relevant topics in a simple language. Therefore, adjust yourself to the proper mood and clearly define the topic of the review and its audience. The topic should be interesting for you personally and be relevant at the time of publication. Identify the target audience. Specialists in what field read the magazine, where are you going to write a review? The likelihood that you will write a good review increases if you have already done this (even if on a different topic). In this case, you can use the previous publication as a basis for entering new data. Do not limit yourself to finding only one scientific literature: this allows you not to miss any really worthwhile publication for review. About 99% of all scientific searches are performed through these online essays systems: DBLP, Google Scholar, ISI Proceedings, JSTOR Search, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science. If you are just starting a review, and some articles are read for the first time, it is absolutely necessary to preserve new information, impressions from read, new thoughts and associations. It is advisable to write all this at once to make it easier to link new thoughts with available results, your personal ideas, etc. It’s better to write around the edges of the book or take notes directly on your computer or tablet: almost all modern program catalogers of the electronic library allow you to leave notes. Literally write down the quotes that you plan to refer to in the review. When writing a draft, try rephrasing these quotes in your own words. It is very important to write out the links already at this stage, in order to avoid a subsequent throw, trying to remember who contains the data. Thus, for the time when you read the selected literature, the draft review will appear on its own. Of course, this project will have to be proofread many times, restructured and rephrased to get the full text without argumentation and arguments. In addition, reviews can be classified as descriptive and conceptual. Descriptive reviews focus on the methodology, the search and interpretation of each study. The authors of the conceptual reviews put forward new ideas and concepts stemming from a number of published materials. Writing reviews of literature does not collect stamps. A good review is not only a summary of the literature, but also a critical analysis that helps to identify methodological problems and indicate gaps in research. Each experimental article, no matter how beautiful and new, can cover only a narrow area of the broad front of science. It is impossible to become an experienced writer, reading advice on how to become a writer. It is impossible to become an artist by viewing the drawing course on TV. It is impossible to write a high quality essay without practice. Successful reviews written in the 80s are rarely read today. However, they once served as the basis for the scientific work of the nineties, from which the experimental theories of the 2000s grew. And today’s books readily quote some of the old articles as classics, which should be equal.