# The catalogue names one council. The source names another.

**Provenance audit · checked 29 August 2026**

Across three public records, data.gov.uk displays North Tyneside as publisher while the description and source page point to Leeds, Liverpool or Newcastle.

**Short answer:** the pages show a metadata mismatch, not proof that the files were rewritten. The cause and the scale still need checking.

## The answer in 30 seconds

- All three data.gov.uk pages display North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council.
- The Data Mill North pages name Leeds City Council, Liverpool City Council and Newcastle City Council.
- We publish no cause, directory-wide rate or contact data.

## What the three records show

| Dataset | Catalogue publisher | What the summary says | Publisher on source | Catalogue Updated | Source last update |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| [Blue badge applications](https://www.data.gov.uk/dataset/e281170e-8c7d-4da9-b09b-b9c287ca8027/blue-badge-applications1) · Harvest 20j71 | North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council | Monthly totals processed by Leeds City Council | [Leeds City Council](https://datamillnorth.org/dataset/blue-badge-applications-20j71) | 15 August 2026 | about 7 years ago |
| [Prompt payment performance statistics](https://www.data.gov.uk/dataset/122d3c65-2d5a-44a4-89b5-3fe939ee2e18/prompt-payment-performance-statistics) · Harvest e5l3g | North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council | Prompt payment performance for Liverpool City Council | [Liverpool City Council](https://datamillnorth.org/dataset/prompt-payment-performance-statistics-e5l3g) | 15 August 2026 | 9 years ago |
| [Newcastle libraries enquiries](https://www.data.gov.uk/dataset/e115d737-4381-44bc-be2b-85acc6e34c26/newcastle-libraries-enquiries2) · Harvest v8go1 | North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council | Monthly branch-level enquiries for Newcastle City Council | [Newcastle City Council](https://datamillnorth.org/dataset/v8go1/newcastle-libraries-enquiries) | 15 August 2026 | 2 years ago |

`Updated` is a metadata label from the catalogue. It does not prove that the CSV changed on the same day.

## How the check worked

1. We recorded the data.gov.uk URL, displayed publisher, `Updated` label, summary and Harvest GUID.
2. We opened the Data Mill North page with the same identifier and recorded its organisation, displayed age and coverage.
3. We counted visible mismatches only and kept the cause open.
4. We archived the consulted pages locally and checked their hashes through QA.

## What this page does not establish

- It is not proof that the data was rewritten.
- It is not a directory-wide rate.
- It is not an assignment of blame.
- It contains no email addresses or people.

## Why this matters to public-data users

The publisher is the first lead for questions and editorial responsibility. When catalogue and source disagree, keep the index page, data source and observation time separate.

## A checklist for the next audit

1. Save the URL and check time.
2. Compare publisher and summary with the source page.
3. Record the Harvest identifier.
4. Do not name a cause without metadata history or the relevant log.

## Sources and versions

- [Blue badge applications, data.gov.uk](https://www.data.gov.uk/dataset/e281170e-8c7d-4da9-b09b-b9c287ca8027/blue-badge-applications1)
- [Prompt payment performance statistics, data.gov.uk](https://www.data.gov.uk/dataset/122d3c65-2d5a-44a4-89b5-3fe939ee2e18/prompt-payment-performance-statistics)
- [Newcastle libraries enquiries, data.gov.uk](https://www.data.gov.uk/dataset/e115d737-4381-44bc-be2b-85acc6e34c26/newcastle-libraries-enquiries2)
- [Official harvesting guidance](https://guidance.data.gov.uk/publish_and_manage_data/harvest_or_add_data/harvest_data/)
- [DCAT harvesting metadata guidance](https://guidance.data.gov.uk/publish_and_manage_data/harvest_or_add_data/harvest_data/dcat/)

The [Romanian edition](https://mariuscomper.uk/cine-publica-datele/) carries the same evidence and limits.