Talk:Abigail Ratchford: Difference between revisions
Boobpedia - Encyclopedia of big boobs
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:I'm gonna go ahead and set it to "enhanced". Plenty of pre-surgery evidence in the following link: http://www.automotofoto.net/models/abigail-ratchford/ Remarkable implants for sure, but good fakes are still fake. ''—[[User:Squalla1|Squalla1]] 00:13, 21 November 2015 (EST)'' | :I'm gonna go ahead and set it to "enhanced". Plenty of pre-surgery evidence in the following link: http://www.automotofoto.net/models/abigail-ratchford/ Remarkable implants for sure, but good fakes are still fake. ''—[[User:Squalla1|Squalla1]] 00:13, 21 November 2015 (EST)'' | ||
::Unless there's credible sources that details she is enhanced I will place it, if not. I would leave it blank. -[[User:Apara|Apara]] | |||
Revision as of 06:44, 29 December 2015
Natural or enhanced
Is there an underboob scar? http://imagetwist.com/br7jmcnrhodu/67FMz.jpg.html
"Are images[1][2][3] a reliable source as far as natural vs. enhanced goes? —Squalla1 13:22, 30 October 2015 (EDT)" Squalla1 send these links to me. What do you think? — Preceeding unsigned comment added by Athanatophobos.
- I'm gonna go ahead and set it to "enhanced". Plenty of pre-surgery evidence in the following link: http://www.automotofoto.net/models/abigail-ratchford/ Remarkable implants for sure, but good fakes are still fake. —Squalla1 00:13, 21 November 2015 (EST)
- Unless there's credible sources that details she is enhanced I will place it, if not. I would leave it blank. -Apara
