Without information on the downsides and failure to perform its function, this page reads more like a PR brochure. Similarly to how a page about "high-tech" security locks on doors would include information on whether or not these were easily defeated (and when) and thus informing the reader that 'No, this isn't a solution'. TheRandomIP ( talk) Surely it is relevant to a page about a particular DRM technology to include information on whether or not it actually performed its intended purpose or not, i.e. Pascal40, thanks for finally removing the column which was my initially preferred solution. He wasn't interested in accurate information at all. So I thought he might be satisfied if I keep the column but remove the poorly sourced information only as he might be willing to find better sources for the missing entries then. In my initial edits I even removed the column completely but then some other editor said he thinks this is "valuable information". ThePaSch ( talk) 12:28, (UTC) Totally agree.
DENUVO CRACK REDDIT CRACKED
It's not Wikipedia's job to inform users whether a software has been cracked or not there are plenty ways for them to find that out on their own, and it does not have much of a bearing on how Denuvo functions as software. Since a poorly source list that ends up nigh-empty once WP:UGC is enforced seems more like cruft to me than anything else, I've went ahead and removed the column from both tables in the article.
DENUVO CRACK REDDIT CRACK
Then Why even bother to list cracked or not if only news can be reliable source? might as well just remove that useless column, people who are interested can just google to find out if it's cracked - Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.125.190.97 ( talk) Agreed with the previous poster currently, the column, at best, does not add much to the article, and, at worst, misinforms (since the lack of an entry in the column may suggest that a crack never existed). But please if you have any other provable information about this xrel site than I have let me know. to keep the column but remove the unreliable sources there (which were most of them). So I had no other choice than to take action and remove this questionable information, resp. And just making something up is no solution either. Of course if would be useful if there were reliable information whether a game is cracked or not. That information are reliable and accurate is the base for everything else. Notice about not reliable source exist since August 2016 but has been ignored by authors. I do not see how this can be an accurate proof whether a game is cracked or not since this site does not offer any cracks, they just have (easy to fake) nfo files. It is therefore not a reliable source as of WP:UGC. xrel is a community based website where everyone can upload nfo files (if you have a user account), one could fake such an nfo file.
![denuvo crack reddit denuvo crack reddit](https://torrentfreak.com/images/pirate-fire-burn.jpg)
It was no reliable sources given for whether the game was "cracked" or not. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
![denuvo crack reddit denuvo crack reddit](https://b2.crackwatch.com/file/crackwatch/public/ogimage.png)
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.