Talk:Perfect Dark (P2P)

Discussion
Can someone improve upon the engrish I translated from the Japanese wiki? I speak Japanese, however, I have problems with finding the right words when converting it to English :/

by Createur 16:18, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Title
Keep title uppercased, as per WP:MOS-TM.--SeizureDog 08:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

More info on use?
Since one of the more recent versions, an native English translation has been coded into the program. This should offer more explanations for the various options and usage of Perfect Dark, is anyone fluent enough in Japanese to make a coherent guide of how to use the program? Should that go into another wiki? What about reverse engineering to learn about all the encryption going on? Has everythin already been stated on the wiki? Iceman B (talk) 11:02, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Ambiguous and Contradictory Legal Issues Section
The legal issues section states "Japanese authorities have not arrested any person responsible for illegal downloading yet, but have arrested a number of people accused of uploading copyrighted material." Is this in reference solely to cases where the user is using Perfect Dark, or in all cases? The article then states "On 11 April 2013, a 39-year-old man from Kasuga City was arrested for downloading copyrighted material from Kadokawa Shoten, Nintendo and manga creator Hideaki Sorachi" — doesn't this contradict the statement that "Japanese authorities have not arrested any person responsible for illegal downloading?" 75.102.193.230 (talk) 06:05, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * There's so much wrong with that last item. The referenced article states that the guy from Kasuga City:


 * 1) turned himself in, leading to his own arrest for possession of unauthorized material, irrespective of its source
 * 2) used both Share and Perfect Dark, with no indication of which content was retrieved with which service
 * 3) was implicated only by his confession and not by any tracking of his use of either software
 * Besides the mere mention Perfect Dark it has zero relevance. The contributor was clearly stretching the facts, and I'm removing the item. If a robust defense can be made for its re-inclusion, I would welcome it, but at the very least it will require more references. 72.201.250.85 (talk) 05:53, 20 September 2013 (UTC)