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. (closed by non-admin page mover) feminist🩸 (talk) 12:59, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of emojis → List of emoji – Inconsistency with main article title: The main article title, which is correctly plural, is titled with the zero-inflection plural form Emoji. I believe only this form qualifies as encyclopedic register, with the ⟨-s⟩ form being informal.
Stephan Leeds (talk) 00:20, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. The -s form is widely used and is hardly informal. Zacwill (talk) 01:16, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did some quick first Google search research and found that AP style guide used emojis from 2013-2013 until 2018, in which it started using emoji. A 2016 article by the Atlantic claimed that Apple and Unicode use emoji though. Meanwhile, Emojipedia uses emojis, but released an article in 2016 based off Google Trends and self-conducted polls claiming emoji was more popular as a written out plural, (though emojis was steadily rising) and emojis was used more in-person speak. It seems to me like emoji is used by more official text-based services, while emojis is more informal. ✨ΩmegaMantis✨^blather 03:43, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• "The main article title, which is correctly plural,..." Why would it be correctly plural in light of WP:SINGULAR? —  AjaxSmack  01:19, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per above. Both "emoji are" and "emojis are" are equally valid constructions, and both seem to be in common use. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Paintspot Infez (talk) 05:19, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]