That says the IPCC revised down their final report from the earlier draft, which accurately described what the models projected. Your article even said they did

That says the IPCC revised down their final report from the earlier draft, which accurately described what the models projected. Your article even said they did that revision without consulting the scientists who made the models. That's entirely consistent with the claim that the IPCC's final reports have been underplaying the actual science, for political reasons. (Your article is also from five years ago, and still talks about the "missing warming." That was always nonsense, but even hardcore deniers have abandoned that talking point since warming in the last five years has been dramatic.)