Talk:Star Trek Into Darkness

Title

I am aware it is not called Star Trek 2, but it sounds more tasteful than Untitled Star Trek Sequel, doesn't it? Rusted AutoParts (talk) 2:36 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Move protected

I have protected this page against page moves until the dispute over the appropriate title is settled. I suggest that a discussion take place to establish a consensus as to the appropriate title for this article. WJBscribe (talk) 15:57, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Agreed - see below. --Rob Sinden (talk) 15:59, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

Star Trek 2 (2013 film) → Star Trek sequel film project – The film is yet untitled and has yet to go into production. Per WP:FILMPROJECT would suggest this as a suitable name as to guess any numerical system would be against WP:CRYSTAL and there are no sources confirming a name. Rob Sinden (talk) 15:59, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Oppose. I already had this redirected to Star Trek XII. Your proposed title is silly, overlong and not what someone wanting to find the article would type in. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 16:16 1 December 2011 (UTC)

But as Star Trek XII is an unsourced title (and gets no hits in a google news search), it is effectively WP:Original research, so we cant have that! Any other suggestions? --Rob Sinden (talk) 16:25, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm just a minor though but, how about Star Trek 2013 Film Project?--Bumblezellio (talk) 16:27, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Star Trek XII (film project) or Star Trek 2 (film project). Rusted AutoParts (talk) 16:30 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Both of these imply that the film has a name. It does not. And Star Trek XII (film project) would have no need for a disambiguator anyway. --Rob Sinden (talk) 16:33, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

How about we merge the page into the Star Trek (2009) under a new section?--Bumblezellio (talk) 16:36, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree with you 100% that this is where the information should be! However, we can't do that after the recent deletion discussion. --Rob Sinden (talk) 16:39, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't warrant redirction, but it seems you can't notice that because you're upset no one agreed with you. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 17:44 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Please stop trying to make this personal. I am not upset(!) I haven't changed my opinion, I still believe this article shouldn't exist, but I'll go with consensus! Now maybe we should get back to the point of where to house it... --Rob Sinden (talk) 18:06, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Very Tenative Support. The title is rather a mouthful, and, as Rusted AutoParts stated, it isn't easy to research. However, the current title is unacceptable, as it is not the second movie in the series. I still think, as I stated in the AfD, that Star Trek (2013 film) is a good title. But, if push comes to shove, I'd rather have the somewhat awkward title proposed by Rob Sinden than the inaccurate title currently on the article. Joefridayquaker (talk) 18:19, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree we should not be making up titles for films.--199.91.207.3 (talk) 18:25, 1 December 2011 (UTC)--70.24.215.154 (talk) 18:24, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Star Trek (2013 film) is really the only thing that makes sense to me and most closely conforms to how we title future films. We know that "Star Trek" will be in the title and that it will probably not contain a numerical.    Thorncrag  18:33, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

• Comment why not just Star Trek 12 ? As the 12th film, this would be a descriptive title. 70.24.248.23 (talk) 07:48, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

It was Star Trek 12 (we had it at Star Trek XII), but i guess that title is WP:OR, even though the series is known for using Roman numerals. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 12:47 2 December 2011 (UTC

The IP states that they think that "Star Trek 12" would be a "descriptive" title, thus avoiding the WP:OR of using Roman numerals. --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:04, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

If we were to use a descriptive title I think something like 12th Star Trek film would be better since that would not imply that 12 is part of the tile.--70.24.215.154 (talk) 18:24, 2 December 2011 (UTC)