You have only one problem: you probably think that architecture is drawing boxes, clouds and connecting lines, with some captions. It is not. Architecture is fist of all some thinking. And this is something which you pretty much missed.
Let's start from the second picture, because this is the apparent gibberish. You put a caption "LAN" on right side, and one element inside is called "Web App". Am I missing something? Are you going to convince us that "World Wide Web" can be aware of some "Web App" placed in "LAN"? I don't think so. Note that in that dreaded client-server model, the active part is only the client, and the server is listening, and passive, acting only on request of the clients. A client on the LAN connected to Internet can send requests to the Web application exposed to internet, but nothing on the Internet cannot request anything in the LAN, unless it is connected to the same LAN.
The first picture is less obvious, but also: what is "Windows App"? Do you understand that is should be a service application? (I don't know what you meant to say, maybe just "some application on Windows OS", but "Windows Application" is usually used to mention some application with UI.) "Windows" is pretty much irrelevant here. The service, to be usable from both the Web and LAN, should be totally abstracted from the OS. Technically, this is quite possible, even with C# only. Also, did you think about CLR clients not connected to your LAN. You could have thinner Web clients (browser based) and thicker CLR clients, with extra capabilities and or performance? One thing you should realize is: Web imposes draconian limitations on the functionality, due to stateless nature of HTTP protocol and domination of client-server model. Before drawing what is connected to what, you should learn the ideas of working under these limitations. So far, without some information on what is the "application" and "clients", looking at this picture and even drawing something similar does not make much sense. But very basically, first picture means starting to think in right direction.
Please understand: not that your "models" are good or not, correct or not. They are not models at all. Considering those pictures is just not serious enough. What to advise? Well, before trying to "draw" the architecture, do some technological research and some basic prototyping, as simple as possible (but not simpler :-)).
—SA
Updated 18-Nov-13 12:54pm
v5