I uploaded a great pic of a blue heeler (here), and then saw that this page already has seven pictures. And they're good ones, too. Should I fit my new blue heeler pic somewhere, or should I not bother? – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)}[[]] 22:14, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)

It's a nice clear shot, and shows the dog's face, too, which is good. Did you take the photo? Elf | Talk 23:44, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Yep. – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)}[[]] 14:42, Oct 3, 2004 (UTC)

Replacing photos

Replaced perfectly good photos removed during frenzy of editing. With the variety of coats & markings & activities, I don't think it hurts at all to have them all here. Took puppy out of main box because it doesn't show what the dog looks like very well, which other shots do much better. What on earth caused this sudden frenzy of editing this page, anyway? Elf | Talk 00:21, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

That was my doing. Appologies if you feel I was a bit to enthusiastic with my delete key. I still think that there are a few too many images (and oddly positioned ones at that) relative to the text in this article and I would advocate removing at least a couple. I will leave it to those more knowledgeable than myself, though. --DaveC 00:35, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Ah HA! So it was YOU! :-) I think that actually the article is probably too short and could have more info, which would spread out some of the photos nicely. They could probably be rearranged a little better here. Maybe I'll try. Elf | Talk 00:50, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

More to it than that, Elf. It turns out there's been a discussion of the page on our 1000-member email list, Australian Cattle Dog-L (ACD-L). Most did not understand the Wiki concept. But there are strong objections, well-founded I think, to the conformationally imperfect specimen at the top of the web page. In particular, the docked tail is troubling to many. OK to solicit a proper replacement? Jimhutchins 03:28, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yet there are quite a few cattle dogs out there with docked tails and the markings are not uncommon. IMHO if someone wants a "conformationally perfect" representation in all photos, they can go to the AKC or FCI or whatever site. I would hope that this article is about real dogs, not just show specimens, despite the fact that we highlight links to the various breed standards. But I am showing my extreme anti-show-breeding bias. I am also not in favor of cropping or docking. So how about using the red speckle that we've already got up into the table? But I would definitely leave in the photo of the docked dog because I think it is representative of a small but significant number of ACDs today. Elf | Talk 17:45, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Jim, is it just the tail? or are there other significant differences between the photo and a show-type dog? If the later, it would be good to have a show dog for comparison (yes, I know, more photos, but they do give so much info). Moving the un-docked photo up sounds good to me - such a fine tail :) -- sannse (talk) 12:48, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Article Consistency

Hey, I've been trying to organize the dog breed articles into the same structure. Where do you think the section on dog activity should go? Health? Temperament? Should it be it's own cateogory?

More at Wikipedia:WikiProject Dog breeds/General - it's own section looks right to me -- sannse (talk) 20:47, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)