Talk:The Sandbox (2012 video game)
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Sandbox (2012 video game) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find video game sources: "The Sandbox" 2012 video game – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Splitting proposal
[edit]- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- Discussion redundant, article has been created through another channel. Lord Belbury (talk) 18:31, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
I propose to split this article into The Sandbox (2012 video game) and The Sandbox (2021 video game), since the two games are entirely different apart from the second one having bought usage rights to the name of the first one. Lord Belbury (talk) 10:06, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Per WP:TOOSOON. The new game appears to fail the Metacritic test with no substantive commentary. With only news articles about how so and so invested in the game, any article created would read like a big puff piece. If and when it gets reviews from gaming publications or some sort of gameplay commentary, I would not be opposed to it. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 10:58, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - I just approved The Sandbox (Blockchain platform) through AfC. Looks like plenty of in-depth sources that cover the platform. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:17, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Proposed merge of The Sandbox (blockchain platform) into The Sandbox (2012 video game)
[edit]- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- The result of this discussion was not merged. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, this game is just a re-release of the original 2012 game but with added NFTs. There does not seem to be a basis for a standalone article, it can be merged into the older article seamlessly. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:55, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. I approved this out of AfC and partially based on the comment from the splitting proposal above which says "since the two games are entirely different apart from the second one having bought usage rights to the name of the first one." The reliable sources talk about it is an entirely different game/platform. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:35, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose as above, seems to be a very different 3D blockchain "game" that decided to sink some money into buying the name of (and presumably access to player contact details or at least free advertising within) an older and very popular app. It's not a simple "re-release". --Lord Belbury (talk) 06:55, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Oppose: These 2 are completely different games, this game has nothing similar to the 2012 game other than its name, which is a complete coincidence. CharlieEdited (talk) 00:03, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.