The bulk update request #3058 is active.

Reason: Getting rid of redundant implications

EDIT: The bulk update request #3058 (forum #342304) has been approved by @bitWolfy.

The bulk update request #3059 is active.

remove implication gigantamax_inteleon (23) -> pokémon_(species) (0)
remove implication gigantamax_lapras (13) -> pokémon_(species) (0)
remove implication gigantamax_machamp (18) -> pokémon_(species) (0)
remove implication gigantamax_meowth (21) -> pokémon_(species) (0)
remove implication gigantamax_pikachu (23) -> pokémon_(species) (0)
remove implication gigantamax_sandaconda (1) -> pokémon_(species) (0)
remove implication gigantamax_snorlax (9) -> pokémon_(species) (0)
remove implication gigantamax_toxtricity (10) -> pokémon_(species) (0)
remove implication gigantamax_venusaur (10) -> pokémon_(species) (0)

Reason: Getting rid of redundant implications

EDIT: The bulk update request #3059 (forum #342305) has been approved by @bitWolfy.

gattonero2001 said:
create implication gigantamax_blaziken (1) -> gigantamax_pokémon (386)
...
create implication gigantamax_gardevoir (2) -> gigantamax_pokémon (386)

I don't think these are valid. They seem to be fan interpretations and not official gigantamax pokemon.

Yeah those two forms don't actually exist in the games. In the TCG Gardevoir has a VMAX card, whatever that means, but I don't think it's relevant here.

The bulk update request #3058 (forum #342304) has been approved by @bitWolfy.

The bulk update request #3059 (forum #342305) has been approved by @bitWolfy.