FirstAlerts

Flood Warning Issued for Barbour WV and Randolph WV Counties

The National Weather Service Charleston WV warning covers southeastern Barbour County and northeastern Randolph County in northeastern West Virginia until 615 PM EDT this evening.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 16, 2026, 11:59 a.m. ET
Developing

Hazard products are revised and cancelled as conditions change. Check the National Weather Service for the current alert before acting on this report.

The has issued a covering two areas in northeastern West Virginia: **Barbour WV** and **Randolph WV**. According to the official National Weather Service alert record, the affected area is "" — a single zone. The alert record headline reads: "." The began at 11:53 AM EDT on August 16, 2026, and runs If you are in southeastern Barbour County or northeastern Randolph County, this applies to you. The record states that flooding caused by excessive rainfall is expected, and that "" The precautions listed in the National Weather Service record: "" The alert was issued by the and published in the agency's raw text product feed.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 116 Aug 2026, 15:59current

    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 — 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 — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — 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 — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — 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.