Add recognition update issue template

This new issue template allows users to submit public proof or documentation signals for the WFGY evidence layer, including various fields for details and validation.
This commit is contained in:
PSBigBig + MiniPS 2026-03-09 13:01:39 +08:00 committed by GitHub
parent a8dcc76019
commit 4b35aee610
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: B5690EEEBB952194

View file

@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
name: Recognition update
description: Submit a public proof, integration, citation, mention, or documentation signal that may belong in the WFGY evidence layer.
title: "[Recognition] "
labels:
- recognition
- proof
body:
- type: markdown
attributes:
value: |
Thanks for helping improve the WFGY public evidence layer.
Use this form for:
- public integrations
- citations
- public mentions
- docs references
- candidate additions for Recognition Map, Adopters, Case Evidence, or Evidence Timeline
Please share stable public proof where possible.
- type: dropdown
id: target_surface
attributes:
label: Target surface
description: Where do you think this update most likely belongs
options:
- Recognition Map
- Adopters
- Case Evidence
- Evidence Timeline
- Not sure
validations:
required: true
- type: dropdown
id: signal_type
attributes:
label: Signal type
description: What kind of public signal is this
options:
- Integration
- Citation
- Mention
- Documentation reference
- Release or milestone
- Other
validations:
required: true
- type: input
id: project_name
attributes:
label: Project or source name
description: Name of the repo, org, paper, article, survey, or public source
placeholder: e.g. LlamaIndex, RAGFlow, ToolUniverse
validations:
required: true
- type: input
id: proof_link
attributes:
label: Public proof link
description: Stable public link to the relevant PR, issue, doc page, article, release, or other source
placeholder: https://github.com/...
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
id: summary
attributes:
label: What happened
description: Briefly describe what became public and why it matters
placeholder: A short explanation of the public proof and why it may matter for WFGY
validations:
required: true
- type: textarea
id: suggested_reading
attributes:
label: Suggested reading
description: How should this be read conservatively
placeholder: e.g. docs mention only, merged integration, research-facing citation, packaging milestone
validations:
required: false
- type: textarea
id: suggested_location
attributes:
label: Suggested placement
description: If you have a recommendation, say where this should go
placeholder: e.g. Recognition Map only, Adopters summary, Case Evidence, Evidence Timeline
validations:
required: false
- type: checkboxes
id: checklist
attributes:
label: Checklist
options:
- label: I included a public link that other people can verify
required: true
- label: I am not claiming paid adoption unless there is explicit public proof
required: true
- label: I understand this may be moved to a different evidence page after review
required: true