This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Moved per consensus. bd2412T 19:58, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
To clarify, while I don't necessarily opposeSpace Quest V, I strongly agree with BDD's point that keeping the subtitle adds consistency with other articles in the series; I also think there is no reason not to include the subtitle (even if sources sometimes shorten the title). ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 20:34, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
That's not exactly what I meant. I just want the titles in this series to be titled consistently. --BDD (talk) 20:41, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
I rephrased my statement above to avoid ambiguity. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 23:40, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Move to Space Quest V per 220.127.116.11. There is no other contender for that name, plenty of sources do omit the subtitle, and WP:SUBTITLE is pretty clear that we should omit the subtitle in such circumstances. — Amakuru (talk) 15:30, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Change vote to Support as proposed. I had not considered the consistency clause in WP:CRITERIA until User:BDD pointed it out below, so it does make sense to leave the subtitle in for the present move. Suggest that the whole series be nominated for subtitle removal afterwards. Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 22:56, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Support as proposed. Let's do this as a first step and have a multi-move to remove the subtitles from the whole series if appropriate. For now, I'd prefer they be consistent. --BDD (talk) 18:15, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Following the success of the King's Quest RM, my first choice is now Space Quest V, and a move of the other games accordingly. --BDD (talk) 18:49, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
It would also be my preference to move this article to the most MOS-compliant version now, and move the others to follow it, rather than having to go through another discussion.--Cúchullaint/c 22:02, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.