Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Pokémon (2nd nominaton)

This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous.
Such material is not meant to be taken seriously.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to List of Digimon. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 00:23, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of Pokémon

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Way too many, there should only be eight Pokemon which should be Eevee and his evolutions. Glaceon (talk) 00:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Digimon. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 00:47, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Even though this is an April Fools AFD, my !vote is serious. We are not Bulbapedia. Catgirllover4ever (talk) 01:04, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I hate Pokèmon. Note the diacritics. TLOM (The Lord of Math) (Message) 01:05, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Split into individual articles about every single Pokémon. It was better the way it was. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 01:06, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Exterminate A Pokémon ate my son. Devonian Wombat (talk) 03:44, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pokédex per WP:COMMONNAME. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 05:16, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete but disagree with Glaceon on the Eevee comment. There should be seventeen Pokémon articles: Eevee, Jolteon, Flareon, Vaporeon, Umbreon, Espeon, Leafeon, Glaceon, Sylveon, Neon, Peon, Galleon, Nickelodeon, Simoleon, Pigeon, Dungeon, and Melungeon. Khemehekis (talk) 13:12, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Remake and get rid of the national dex. Obviously. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 15:29, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Obviously every Pokemon in existence needs an article. Foxnpichu (talk) 17:44, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.