The bulk update request #2222 has been rejected.

create implication thirteenth_doctor (9) -> the_doctor (0)
create implication cyberman (4) -> doctor_who (419)
create implication rose_tyler_(doctor_who) (0) -> doctor_who (419)
create implication captain_jack_harkness (0) -> doctor_who (419)
create implication amy_pond (7) -> doctor_who (419)
create implication martha_jones (0) -> doctor_who (419)
create implication clara_oswald (2) -> doctor_who (419)
create implication river_song (1) -> doctor_who (419)
create implication jenny_flint (2) -> doctor_who (419)
create implication madame_vastra (3) -> doctor_who (419)
create implication novice_hame (2) -> doctor_who (419)
create implication androvax (1) -> doctor_who (419)
create implication adipose_(doctor_who) (1) -> doctor_who (419)
create implication judoon (0) -> doctor_who (419)
create implication silurian (5) -> doctor_who (419)

Reason: Part 2 of 2 since it was over the 25 limit for BURS. Part 1 here: topic #32982

The first is because she is one specific incarnation) of a character.
The rest of them are making other characters, species, and items from Doctor Who imply the IP. Shoutout to topic #2480 covering sonic_screwdriver and topic #2379 covering weeping_angel.

I'm not sure if the_doctor should stay as it is or if it should be the_doctor_(doctor_who) instead. What do you guys think, is it too ambiguous?

EDIT: The bulk update request #2222 (forum #330275) has been rejected by @Cloudpie.

You could have used the topic number to stick them into the same thread. If you tried to do that now, it wouldn't let you add in votes.

furrin_gok said:
You could have used the topic number to stick them into the same thread. If you tried to do that now, it wouldn't let you add in votes.

Ah shit, I didn't know that, thanks for telling me

The bulk update request #2222 (forum #330275) has been rejected by @Cloudpie.