The bulk update request #2969 has been rejected.

create implication cetitan (33) -> pokémon_(species) (0)
create implication fidough (99) -> pokémon_(species) (0)
create implication paldean_wooper (84) -> paldean_form (133)
create implication paldean_form (133) -> regional_form_(pokémon) (0)
create implication tera_orb (5) -> pokémon (0)

Reason: https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Cetitan_(Pok%C3%A9mon)#

https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Fidough_(Pok%C3%A9mon)#

https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Regional_form#Paldean_Form

EDIT: https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Terastal_phenomenon

might be relevant in the near future

https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Tera_Orb

I'll wait for more information to decide whether to use terastal_phenomenon, terastallization or both, and how it should fit the implication structure

EDIT: The bulk update request #2969 (forum #341224) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

I'd go with with terastal pokémon just like with gigantamax pokémon.

We also have dynamax but not every pic is of a Pokémon. You'd think the ones that are would be tagged dynamax pokemon but not all of them are. (Also neither tag has any implications.)

edit: shoot the latter has no é either. Perhaps some cleanup is in order

The bulk update request #2969 (forum #341224) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

Why were these rejected? They're valid implications, and not already done. topic #31911 was also rejected, even though regieleki and regidrago from it are still missing their implications.

watsit said:
Why were these rejected? They're valid implications, and not already done. topic #31911 was also rejected, even though regieleki and regidrago from it are still missing their implications.

There are other pending BURs with the same requests that are currently being reviewed.