What Would You Do? Mismatched Dates on Slides

So, I have a fancy pants file naming method that I use when saving images that I have archived. This method requires inclusion of both the source description that exists as an original part of the source material and any additional information existing on the source material in addition to the source description. What do you do when these conflict?


Here, the date description shows the slide was developed in February 1984. But, Grandpa wrote that the picture is from September 1984, after the slide was developed.

What would you do?

I know what I did -- I recorded all information from the slide into the file name and gave Grandpa the benefit of the doubt about which date to apply to this image. Thus, this file is named:

840900.FEB 84 P 3 (23).'Rosies surprise' - Lake Powell (Sept 84).jpg

This seemingly impossible file name (to my eyes) is just gibberish (to your eyes, probably) unless you understand the file naming method I use. But, it presents a very minor diversion about how either memories or film developing can be fallible. That's about the extent of the diversion -- humans are fallible.

TIP: You cannot undue past mistakes -- and you certainly should not try to rewrite history -- but you can ensure that our fallible moments are preserved as an important part of the human experience.

UPDATE

Dave writes in the comments

Oooh - I'd disagree with you on this one. I would expect the automated dating system from a photo developing place to be much more accurate than a penciled-in recollection. I would bet this was taken in September 1983 (not 4) and then developed in February 1984.

Maybe. Probably. Hopefully, we can find out.