Draft talk:Project Drawdown

	Climate change portal This draft is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide

Science

This draft is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience

Technology

This draft is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology

Added Reception section with independent secondary sources; removed deprecated Forbes citation and unsourced co-founder claim

Latest comment: 1 day ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Resubmitting after substantially reworking the sourcing in response to the notability decline. The draft now has a Reception section built on independent secondary coverage. Addressing WP:NCORP directly, the three sources I would point to:

1. Duchin, Faye (2017). "Climate optimism gets a road map". Science 356 (6340): 811. doi:10.1126/science.aan2293 — Review in a top-tier journal by an economist with no connection to the organization, containing original critical assessment of the project's modelling approach, including where her own published work on plant-rich diets reached different conclusions.

2. Brown, Marilyn A.; et al. (2021). "Translating a Global Emission-Reduction Framework for Subnational Climate Action: A Case Study from the State of Georgia". Environmental Management 67 (2): 205–227. doi:10.1007/s00267-020-01406-1 — Peer-reviewed paper by Georgia Tech researchers that takes Project Drawdown's framework as its object of study, adapts it to state level, and discusses its strengths and limitations. This is coverage of the organization's work rather than of the 2017 book, which I understand was the gap in the previous version.

3. Beslik, Sasja (2018). "Did Project Drawdown miss a crucial climate solution?" GreenBiz, 23 March 2018 — Independent critique arguing the organization's rankings omit capital reallocation and sustainable investing. I have also removed a Forbes contributor citation (per WP:FORBESCON) and an unsourced co-founder claim.

Grateful for any steer on what is still short. Rainbow Nelson (talk) 19:41, 29 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Added Reception section with independent secondary sources; removed deprecated Forbes citation and unsourced co-founder claim