User talk:AnonymousEditor/sandbox

First Draft Context Memo

For this first draft I feel like I'm lacking content. The Any-angle path planning page seems to have a decent amount of content, but I felt that it could use some rewording to make the concepts clearer. I would like to make an image or two to add to the article, but I don't know the best way do that right now. I felt unsure while writing this article since I'm not sure how long the ideal article for this topic should be. I feel that the article needs to be made clearer and have a few pictures added, but overall does not need to be made significantly longer. I looked at the A* article and the pathfinding article as a guide. The pathfinding article is reasonably long, but this is due to the explanations for several algorithms. To me this seems redundant since the respective articles contain all of the information a reader would want to know about each algorithm. Because of this, I don't think the Any-angle path planning article should have more than a short summary about each algorithm. I've instead created a start for the Theta* article with commented pseudocode for the algorithm. If necessary I can create new articles for the algorithms I covered in my lit review and add what information I can to them. I would like to know what else people think should be added to or made clearer in the Any-angle path planning article.

Looking at this from the perspective of Wikipedia as a whole, I chose this article since it seemed to be quite short given the amount of material on these algorithms. If separate articles are created for each algorithm, I don't think there is an issue with the Any-angle path planning article's brevity. Regarding the standards: 1) Non-triviality: The concept of any-angle path planners is not a trivial concept, and I think my modifications make the concept clearer. My draft of the Theta* article further explains how the algorithm works. 2) Quality: I think I made some of the language clearer and addressed a couple of the concerns on the talk page. The Theta* article fills in a missing part of Wikipedia. 3) Credibility: I have added some citations and will add more once the changes are incorporated into the article. The Theta* article will only have a few sources since most of the content will only come from one paper. The papers that I have used and are currently used in the live article are from conferences and journals. 4) NPOV: I think the tone of the current article and my changes are neutral. (I don't think this could be anything but neutral even if I tried.)

AnonymousEditor (talk) 02:59, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review

What works: The first sentence gives a clear description of what Any-path finding is. For people who don't know what it is, they can click on the links for pathfinding and any other included for clarity. A solid example of Any-path, following the general description, could help with more clarity.

• The layout is clear
• Are your sources the numbered list at the very bottom? Very reliable, literature sources. Make sure to add more citations where needed and add more sources if possible.
• I like that the pseudocode is included in the page. It's helpful for more code-oriented people to understand how this is applied.More examples like this I would recommend to be included.

Improvements:

• You are right that figures and image could be used. If you don't know where to start in creating an image, I would advise either draw one out on paper to get an idea of where to start, or see what figures are already out there (they don't have to be specific to Any-angle path) and use those as a reference.
• For images, you could also place a sample algorithm such as the one on pathfinding. The one below is just an example I made. There is a lot you can do without having to draw it

  Binary Tree Method
          X
       /     \
      X       X
    /   \    /  \
  X     X   X    X
 / \     \        \
X   X      X      X
      \   /  \
      X  X   X

• Perhaps more "Examples" of application can be included. Also, more descriptions, if possible, on sections like Pseudocode (maybe describe what the following code is doing or have a image to visualize it) and Variants.
• The article could include more links. For example, the A* based algorithm has it's own Wiki page. A brief, clear explanation of it can be included in the section and contain a link to the separate page. Links can also be included for ANYA, Field D*, or any technical terms that may have an article on Wikipedia (and a link for "algorithms" on the very top).
• Are there any more details that can be included in brief sections like Applications?

Minor Edits

• Under the Description section: "Basic Theta* is the most simple version of Theta*" ...most simple?
• In same section: "the parent of node is always its neighbor." Do you mean "parent node" or do I just not know my coding that well?
• In the beginning, it reads "This results in paths that appear natural and direct." What does this mean exactly? Are "natural" and "direct" mathematical terms that the reader should know? If so, maybe a link to articles about them could be added. If not, then what does the article mean by natural and direct?

Though it's a bit short, it has a clear definition of what Any-path finding is and gives a helpful example of it, namely the pseudocode. I think the most important improvement for the article is clarity. Clarity of the concept can be best explained through concrete examples and images. The article is short as the topic is not widely known but it's a great start.

Sir Rin (talk) 01:22, 29 November 2016 (UTC)