This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Climate change Low‑importance This article 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 articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide Sanitation Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sanitation, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sanitation 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.SanitationWikipedia:WikiProject SanitationTemplate:WikiProject Sanitationsanitation articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hello,

• Wikipedia has a style guide for linking, normally section headers should not contain links to other articles. For the Product Lifescycle Models, links should be made in the body of the section, the first time it is mentioned. More info can be found on Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Linking
• Write out the full version and the abbreviation at first occurrence. Example, "non-governmental organization (NGO)".
• Policy tools - Is "regulatory and information instruments and partnerships." one tool? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Totranm ( talk • contribs) 04:23, 12 December 2016 (UTC) reply

- Totranm ( talk)

• Links:  Done
• NGO:  Done Only used once. Now written in full.
• I have no opinion on the Policy tools question. Alsee ( talk) 03:10, 14 December 2016 (UTC) reply

This article was nominated for deletion on 2 September 2016. The result of the discussion was keep.

Ueutyi ( talk) 17:11, 3 September 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: The outcome was actually "withdrawn", with no real evaluation on the merits of the article at the time. However the article has been developing nicely. Alsee ( talk) 03:14, 14 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Hey! I like the detail and depth of your article. It does look like one section might be incomplete, The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) section, but other than that it looks great! Cduran21 ( talk) 01:40, 14 December 2016 (UTC) reply