User talk:Sunt727

Morphosis Architects (3rd Choice)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphosis_Architects

1. Projects section of this article is out of date. It needs additional recent projects from this architects and images as well. 2. In the history part, it said that Boston Globe architecture critic Robert Campbell called Morphosis "one of the country's most interesting" architecture firms. Only one boastful comment of a firm is not neutral enough.

Sunt727 (talk) 19:41, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

CityEngine （1st Choice)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CityEngine

Problems: 1. Release section is out of date. This part claims the latest version is 2015.2, which current release one is 2017.1. 2. Publications sector is not comprehensive enough, as it only provides official or semi-official paper written by the developing team of this software. 3. Reference #2 is out of date and not able to link the correct video source.

Potential sources related to this article: 1. Urban Planning application: Procedural Modeling of a Residential Site Using the Interoperability between the GIS and CityEngine

https://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=13&sid=6b61727b-66d4-4e5f-b835-37346e835948%40sessionmgr4008

2. The famous examples in the movie industry: Esri UC: How CityEngine powered Disney’s Zootopia http://gpsworld.com/esri-uc-how-cityengine-powered-disneys-zootopia/

3. Computer vision study (including considerable algorithms): Random Exploration of the Procedural Space for Single-View 3D Modeling of Buildings https://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=23&sid=6b61727b-66d4-4e5f-b835-37346e835948%40sessionmgr4008

What I suppose to edit: 1. Add more information from the references about CGA shape grammar system, and get the examples 2. "Features" section is not clear enough; I would like to add more content in the Python: Integrated Python scripting interface. 3. Add more recent release versions and new features the company added per release. 4. Add a solution section to include the "GeoDesign" section and other applications, such as the planning analysis and Disney animations. 5. Add more description about this platform with geographic information system (GIS) system in the first introduction paraphrase.

Sunt727 (talk) 19:29, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

WeChat (2nd Choice)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WeChat

Problems: 1. Rich contents in censorship section and lack of global market analysis 2. Sources are not neutral enough, mostly comprised of news articles. Wechat obtains large user database and widely contributes to urban studies.

Potential sources related to this article: 1. The Recent introduction of WeChat's trend and competitivity: In China, Trading Begins on WeChat

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-15/china-s-bankers-cut-bond-deals-where-others-post-dinner-pics

2. A comprehensive research of its social impact: Excessive use of WeChat, social interaction and locus of control among college students in China

https://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=28&sid=6b61727b-66d4-4e5f-b835-37346e835948%40sessionmgr4008

3. Urban study based on WeChat database: Managing social risks at the housing demolition stage of urban redevelopment projects: A stakeholder-oriented study using social network analysis https://ac.els-cdn.com/S0263786317304441/1-s2.0-S0263786317304441-main.pdf?_tid=cb1c32fc-b3b5-11e7-82f0-00000aacb361&acdnat=1508298083_78f7cd2b8e3ea08adc45590e66c23feb

What I suppose to edit: 1. The second paraphrase of the introduction is going too early to the recent release feature; I may change it to let readers get more general features of this software at first and then the contemporary beta features. 2. "Mobile phone application" section is out of date; I would like to add more details of how the mobile phone app interacts with wechat desktop client. 3. Add WeChat Sport into the "feature" section 4. Create a new part of the data collection and its analysis based on WeChat, since this is one of the excellent data sources in Chinese data analysis field

Sunt727 (talk) 19:40, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Your first choice looks great. Go for it.
--Eric WritingMan (talk) 16:40, 2 November 2017 (UTC)