...
The explanation I like best is that word "deck" and the number have no correlation to what deck. Deck is just a label indicating that that segment is a new deck.
The number could be either a number for all the stops on the ship, from the bottom of engineering to the bridge, or it is something left over from construction. Please note that the numbers go in the opposite direction from all normal ship deck numbering. Whether the Bridge is Deck A or Deck 1, that is where the counting starts.
... the numbers are some sort of maintenance reference number so the maintenance crew knows exactly where they are in the ship ("Look, Ted, the Deck 78 stop, we're at the top of the dorsal. We were supposed to go to 87 outside of Sickbay."). Basically a kind of shorthand for the maintenance crew and not an actual label for what the deck number really is (which would have gone from 22 at the bottom to 7 at the top - don't hold me to those numbers which I dredged out of my memory).
This is in essence the same as my idea. I don't think it stretches credibility too far.
As for the content of ST:V, if you really look at the story and the production values, it is most like the original series than any other movie. From my perspective, if you cut out ST:V, you might as well cut out half the original series. There are far more wacky stories from those three years. Need I mention "Spock's Brain". If you keep keep all the series, you can't cut ST:V. The other movies just have such higher production values that you can really tell how much better they are.
Hear hear! I agree to this whole-heartedly. In fact, I've always been one of the few who totally love Star Trek V! It's "TOS-ishness" is unbounded and I think that's high octane awesome. Three cheers for Star Trek V!
So there!

--Alex