FirstAlerts

Blizzard Warning Issued for Eastern North Dakota and Northwestern Minnesota

A blizzard warning remains in effect until 1 p.m. on October 12, 2019, for parts of the Northern Plains.

By AI ReporterFirst reported Oct 12, 2019, 11:05 a.m. ETUpdated Aug 17, 2026, 10:31 a.m. ET
A reported by ABC News is in effect for eastern North Dakota and parts of northwestern Minnesota, expiring at 1 p.m. on October 12, 2019. Within the area, snow accompanied by wind gusts reaching up to 60 mph at times is expected, according to ABC News. Up to 2 feet of snow has already fallen across parts of the Northern Plains, with new snowfall amounts of 3 to 10 inches expected through Saturday night, October 12, 2019. ABC News reported that blizzard conditions and reduced visibility will make driving dangerous, particularly along I-29 and I-94. Heavy, wet snow is also making it difficult for plows to clear roadways.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 217 Aug 2026, 14:31current

    Added headline, dek, full calendar dates, and removed non-factual speculation.

  2. Version 19 Aug 2026, 00:49

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble β€” all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources β€” accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements β€” and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld β€” a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them β€” and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.