Comments:Smoke from massive warehouse fire in Buffalo, New York USA can be seen 40 miles away

Good stuff

I hope Wikinews can avoid "un-named" people. It's "un"-participatory. I know you gotta do what you gotta do, whilst (<-- can't believe I'm using that word) mentioning that I am talking about an open 'attitude', let that reflect on your approach. -Edbrown05 08:29, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

With the exception of the woman, it wasn't so much as they did not want to be named, but I just looked over my written notes, but aside from the area I as in there were at least 1000 people watching the fire in various places. I felt it inappropriate to ask officers for names and too much information when they were doing their job. Not to mention the firemen, which were impossible to get to given that the warehouse was full of junk from cars to boats to fuel. I got to the scene later than I wanted as I had to walk/run to get there. It was gettign dark, and considering that, I like the images I got. But if you search around Google and Flickr, and the local WIVB and WGRZ news sites, some got way better than me. But do a search for the news on the situation, and as of the moment, Wikinews has the most comprehensive article than any of the local outlets...>AGAIN. DragonFire1024 09:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Interesting perspective, no wonder I hang out here. :) Edbrown05 09:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Nice work DragonFire. --Nzgabriel | Talk 10:39, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

• I think it is a decently written article and many of the pictures are useful, although some of the photos are so obscured they don't contribute anything to the article other than sequence. I do think though that the topic compared to other topics under consideration is more local and less important, although it is much more recent than most of the other stories under consideration. But with some editing of the photos (as another commentator noted), it is a worthwhile contribution to the news, if not human events... Stevenmitchell 16:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)