Feet rating stats (168 total votes)
103
beautiful
beautiful
41
nice
nice
14
ok
ok
6
bad
bad
4
ugly
ugly
| Rating: | (beautiful feet) |
| You Rated: | (click to rate) |
| Email me on new: Pictures Wall Posts | |
Gallery Settings
more info18 pictures were removed from this gallery.
People who liked Palak Tiwari's feet, also liked:
Comment section
The comment section is intended for intellectual discussions over symmetry and aesthetics.
Insultive/bigoted/sexually explicit comments and political discussions are prohibited.
Describing of fantasies is prohibited. Videos/links must follow the same standards as photos.
In short - stay classy ;)
Insultive/bigoted/sexually explicit comments and political discussions are prohibited.
Describing of fantasies is prohibited. Videos/links must follow the same standards as photos.
In short - stay classy ;)
* Enforced by The Guild more info
|
2022-10-04 15:18:09 6439028
|
|
User rated ★★★★(nice feet)
|
2018-04-20 13:08:53 Well , Now I must say I stand corrected.
After some belated diligence I found out that the girl was younger than I thought. I must admit that women's feet for some reason are the last remaining things that make me emotional. I am aware of the bitterness of my words. While I have no "fan-love" for the girl in question , I just wished to be the first one to introduce someone's profile to this site. And she still looked old enough in her pictures to be cautiously perved upon -- considering she voluntarily posed for them and got payed in return. I remember missing the boat on Elle Fanning. It immediately pushed me to a degree of sentimental crankiness when I found half my pictures removed. It is very decent of you not to respond in the same temper. I am sorry for being the idiot at the end and I wish the best to the young girl and to your site. Thanks. |
|
User rated ★★★★(nice feet)
|
2018-04-19 12:18:02 I know the rules here. I know ' underage is underage '. But should you not be asking the person reporting the image as underage for proof ? Particularly when it is not obvious ? Yet another picture was removed for being a duplicate after the same picture of a slightly higher resolution were added.
I understand the need to be petty, but if people have to play lawyers here then you should know that even in a defamation case the offended party has to prove the wrongdoing, which in this case is the person alleging a pic being underage. Would it be ok if someone else could randomly report the pictures now left as underage as well ? If you must know, the girl in the picture will turn 18 in October 2018, and 99% of her pics on google are publicity pics for a movie that was released while she was 17. What higher level of proof does one need here ? However, I do understand comedy power play of some "experienced" user, and I wont argue against that. |
|
2018-04-19 13:17:16 She was underage in all these pics. Use Google or check date of upload in Instagram
|
|
2018-04-19 13:25:52 pic 1 published 21 sept. 2016 on https://www.indiatimes.com (15 years old)
pic 2 published 17 dec. 2014 on https://daily.bhaskar.com (14 years old) pic 3 published 3 dec. 2016 on bollywoodstarkids.blogspot.com (16 years old) pic 4 upgraded pic 5 published 16 nov. 2016 in Instagram (16 years old) pic 6 published 19 feb. 2017 in Instagram (16 years old) |
|
User rated ★★★★(nice feet)
|
2018-04-19 07:33:13 I would like to hear from the brave idiot who has reported these pictures please. it is an unpleasant beginning to a new page, as well as an unnecessary insult to the young actor. I know we all like attention but still....
|
|
2018-04-19 07:44:51 I did not report your pics but underage is underage this is wikiFeet rules!
Unless you have evidence otherwise? |
|
2018-04-19 07:56:13 Uploading pictures of celebs wherein they're younger than 17 is not allowed
|
