The tag implication #43277 candy_bar -> food has been rejected.

Reason: A candy bar is food, and just "candy" already has the implication to food.

EDIT: The tag implication candy_bar -> food (forum #325471) has been rejected by @bitWolfy.

Why not imply candy_bar -> candy instead?

A lot of these look like the same thing as chocolate_bar, whats the difference?

faucet said:
A lot of these look like the same thing as chocolate_bar, whats the difference?

Non-chocolate candy bars exist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candy_bar#Non-chocolate_bars

scaliespe said:
Why not imply candy_bar -> candy instead?

Because I didn't think of it? :)

Seriously, that would probably be a better implication than my suggestion in the OP.

The bulk update request #1901 is active.

create implication candy_bar (109) -> candy (23338)

Reason: What imagoober actually meant. :p

imagoober said:
Because I didn't think of it? :)

Seriously, that would probably be a better implication than my suggestion in the OP.

Oh, how well I know that feeling.

Addendum: What I actually meant. :\

There's always, always a screwup to fix. >:( It is supposed to be an implication, not an alias.

EDIT: The bulk update request #1901 (forum #325501) has been approved by @bitWolfy.

clawstripe said:
The bulk update request #1901 is active.

create implication candy_bar (109) -> candy (23338)

Did you mean to make this an implication?

interstition said:
Did you mean to make this an implication?

Sigh, yes, I did. Thank you for the catch. It's fixed now.

The tag implication candy_bar -> food (forum #325471) has been rejected by @bitWolfy.

The bulk update request #1901 (forum #325501) has been approved by @bitWolfy.