Talk:Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things

Merge from Cradle to cradle design

Cradle to cradle design might be a concept apart from the book, but the overlap is substantial, and the articles are a long way from being distinct enough to justify separate articles. I assume it was made without realising that this article existed.

I propose that Cradle to cradle design be merged into this article - if no objections in the next week or three, I'll merge it. If I remember :). --Singkong2005 ^talk 03:43, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

A merge seems appropriate please go ahead!

The Writing Style of the Wiki Entry

The wiki headline itself looks like someone wrote it by looking at something like a New York Times review. This in itself _may_ not be a bad thing, but I feel that it looks like it may be breaking the NPOV. I'm not too sure about it though, so some other people may want to look at this over some more.

RM'd section: OR

The authors leave out some important information. They include no citations to support various claims. And while they talk about the book's paper, they do not tell readers that it is actually polypropylene film, rather than one of many available and far more benign bioplastics. They also leave out any recycling mark. So when the book is discarded it will not return to nature, nor will it be reborn as another product. Instead, it will probably end up as foreign waste in a regular paper recycling stream. Thus some would argue the book contradicts its own thesis.

removed original research here until a citation can be found and the text rewritten as neutral. --164.76.12.161 (talk) 22:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Rewriting

This article needs a pretty substantial rewrite. A lot of it is very closely paraphrased from this -- much too closely. I will start rewriting it, but it may not be until later today. — GorillaWarfare ^talk 17:06, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090817023633/http://global-ecoforum.ning.com/video/2251574%3AVideo%3A3382 to http://global-ecoforum.ning.com/video/2251574%3AVideo%3A3382
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110524115731/http://www.gleeds.tv/index.cfm?video=627 to http://www.gleeds.tv/index.cfm?video=627

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:31, 14 August 2017 (UTC)