A review of route cards, spoken-name notes and translations requested at the wall finds a gap between the total in the public summary and the conditions recorded at the notice wall at East Entry. The difference does not prove that anyone misstated the file. It shows what the public count leaves out: a place has a spoken name that does not fit the current carved label.
The route cards, spoken-name notes and translations requested at the wall lists 46 public cards with a translated destination and a route mark; the previous window lists 44. Tikka Reed checked both against walk-through notes from every branch paired with the posted passage map. The source was checked against a second copy held by Kip Moss. No dated correction to either copy was present when the comparison closed.
Mappers favor the shorter carved label. Residents want the local name kept on the card as a search term. The office has not supplied a separate measure that would settle the disagreement, so the two explanations remain competing accounts.
This report supports a narrower finding: the count is repeatable, but it is not enough to decide how a new resident can ask for directions when a sign and a spoken name differ.
Residents and route crews submit corrections before the public table closes. The Year fourth, first seep window 1 file remains open for its scheduled decision. The notice wall will add a cross-name card beside the carved label.
