The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Speedy keep/WP:SNOW. I also think the nom has withdrawn. (non-admin closure) JuniperChill (talk) 10:47, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pokémon Red, Blue, and Yellow → Pokémon Red, Blue and Yellow – The second comma is unnecessary, so we can remove it per WP:CONCISE. Popcornfud (talk) 19:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose For me, I find the second comma to be necessary (see Oxford comma), but more importantly, removing the comma does not actually make a meaningful difference. CONCISE is not a great argument for such tiny changes. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Per the Wikipedia MOS (MOS:OXFORD), editors can use or not use Oxford commas, but articles should be consistent about using one or the other.

  The article does seem to use Oxford commas at least some of the time (eg in the sentence a comprehensive Pokémon encyclopedia, by capturing, evolving, and trading to obtain all 151 creatures), so that might be an argument for preserving it in the title.

  I ordinarily don't care either way about Oxford commas — but I personally think brevity is important enough for article titles that even the removal of a single character is a worthwhile change. Popcornfud (talk) 19:59, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I'll add that this is not a case where the comma removes any ambiguity, though. Popcornfud (talk) 20:02, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - The removal of a single character is not a degree of brevity that makes a difference in any way that matters in terms of WP:CONCISE and is in contravention to MOS:OXFORD which allows for either convention. - Aoidh (talk) 20:34, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose move. That's not a valid reason to remove the Oxford comma. O.N.R. ^(talk) 23:55, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - stretch to interpret WP:CONCISE in this way. Stick to the current usage. – Pbrks ^(t·c) 01:36, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - per MOS:OXFORD. (Oinkers42) (talk) 02:17, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - as per MOS:OXFORD 1432423132Atalk 06:51, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• This is clearly a WP:SNOWBALL situation so if another editor wants to close the discussion I'll support that. Popcornfud (talk) 10:26, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]