Pleonasm is generally understood to be the use of more words (or in some cases syllables) than are necessary to convey a clear meaning. It is a very subjective label, more so than even is usual, and as is said, "one person's pleonasm, may be another's style of expression". Indeed there are many instances where it pleonasms are required such as in legally operative phrases, and many more where pleonasms have become such common usage that to drop them is generally confusing. The common example of "tuna fish" where simply "tuna" would do in most cases as being understood as a fish regardless, for instance is deeply embedded in common usages in many areas of English speaking populations. The common legally operative phrase, "null and void" has specific meaning in various legal document contexts beyond the meaning of either word on its own. Sometimes it is difficult to differentiate between something that is said a certain way for emphasis, or even for comic effect and what may reasonably called pleonasm. A most assiduous and comprehensive explanation [giggle] of pleonasm may be found in Wikipedia.
So below we will list some phases, which may or may not be pleonastic. Or perhaps more accurately may be pleonastic to some and not to others. Many of the adamant enemies of the pleonast, may overlap with the folk who really just don't get the idea of nuance, or if they get it don't approve. So the topic moves in many directions, but we do find it amuzing, which is the most important thing after all?