Update CONTRIBUTING.md

CONTRIBUTING.md

@@ -1,66 +1,266 @@
-## Contributing
+# Contributing
 
-Thank you for contributing to this repository.
+Thank you for contributing to WFGY.
 
-This project is maintained with a focus on inspectable work, verifiable references, and clear scope boundaries.  
-To reduce ambiguity and avoid overstated claims, contributions are routed into a small number of reviewable lanes.
+WFGY is maintained as a public ecosystem for reasoning, debugging, evaluation, and structural AI system analysis.
 
-At the current stage, there are two primary contribution lanes. Most accepted PRs are expected to fall into one of them.
+This repository values:
 
-### Priority lane A: Tension Universe MVP Experiments
+* inspectable work
+* verifiable references
+* narrow scope
+* explicit assumptions
+* conservative claims
+* readable structure
 
-The highest priority contribution path is expanding and improving the Tension Universe MVP experiment layer.
+The goal is not to sound bigger than the evidence supports.  
+The goal is to make useful work easier to inspect, verify, improve, and extend.
 
-This lane focuses on adding or improving MVP experiment pages under the `TensionUniverse/Experiments/` collection.  
-An MVP experiment here does not mean a solved claim, a final proof, or a complete benchmark. It means a narrow, inspectable page with explicit assumptions and a reproducible or at least reviewable protocol.
+## A simple rule for contributing
+
+If any part of this repository falls below a clear scientific standard, it is worth improving.
+
+That includes cases where:
+
+* a statement is too vague
+* a claim is too strong
+* a boundary is unclear
+* a link is broken
+* a section is hard to navigate
+* a label is misleading
+* a sentence is imprecise
+* a word choice weakens rigor
+
+In this repository, even a one-word fix can be a meaningful contribution if it improves clarity, accuracy, or auditability.
+
+Small contributions are welcome.  
+Precision is part of the work.
+
+---
+
+## What kinds of contributions are welcome
+
+At the current stage, contributions usually fall into a small number of reviewable lanes.
+
+### Priority lane A: Tension Universe MVP experiments
+
+One priority contribution path is improving the Tension Universe MVP experiment layer.
+
+This lane focuses on adding or refining MVP experiment pages under the `TensionUniverse/Experiments/` collection.
+
+An MVP experiment here does not mean a solved claim, a final proof, or a complete benchmark.  
+It means a narrow, inspectable artifact with explicit assumptions and a reproducible or at least reviewable protocol.
 
 Typical contributions in this lane include:
 
-- adding a new MVP experiment page for an open Tension Universe problem
-- improving an existing MVP experiment page with clearer structure, tighter scope, or better protocols
-- attaching small supporting artifacts that belong to the MVP page, such as notebooks, Colab links, screenshots, or structured notes
+* adding a new MVP experiment page for an open Tension Universe problem
+* improving an existing MVP experiment page with tighter scope or clearer structure
+* attaching supporting artifacts that belong to the MVP page, such as notebooks, Colab links, screenshots, or structured notes
 
 Start here:
 
-- [Tension Universe MVP contribution guide](https://github.com/onestardao/WFGY/blob/main/TensionUniverse/CONTRIBUTING.md)
+* [Tension Universe MVP contribution guide](./TensionUniverse/CONTRIBUTING.md)
 
-### Priority lane B: Recognition Map updates
+---
 
-The second priority lane is maintaining a verified, public recognition record of where WFGY has been cited, integrated, adapted, or discussed across the ecosystem.
+### Priority lane B: public proof and recognition updates
 
-If you find a public repository, benchmark, article, doc page, course page, or discussion that includes WFGY, you are welcome to help keep this list accurate.
+A second priority contribution path is maintaining an accurate, public record of where WFGY has been cited, integrated, adapted, referenced, or discussed.
 
-You can contribute by:
+If you find a public repository, benchmark, article, survey, doc page, course page, or discussion that includes WFGY, you are welcome to help keep the evidence layer accurate.
 
-- adding a missing entry
-- updating an outdated description
-- attaching a better proof link
-- correcting categorization
-- submitting a PR with a new citation or integration
+Typical contributions in this lane include:
 
-Forks and PRs are welcome. If your project includes WFGY in any public form, feel free to add it to this recognition list with a short description and a verifiable link.
+* adding a missing public reference
+* improving a weak or outdated proof link
+* correcting categorization
+* clarifying how a public mention should be read conservatively
+* suggesting whether a case belongs in Recognition Map, Adopters, Case Evidence, or Evidence Timeline
 
-Recognition Map:
+Useful pages in this lane include:
 
-- [WFGY Recognition Map](https://github.com/onestardao/WFGY/blob/main/recognition/README.md)
+* [Recognition Map](./recognition/README.md)
+* [Adopters](./ADOPTERS.md)
+* [Case Evidence](./CASE_EVIDENCE.md)
+* [Evidence Timeline](./EVIDENCE_TIMELINE.md)
 
-### Other contributions are also welcome
+---
 
-In addition to the two priority lanes above, other forms of contributions are welcome, for example:
+### Priority lane C: documentation, navigation, and wording precision
 
-- wording and clarity improvements
-- typo fixes
-- broken link fixes
-- navigation and formatting improvements
-- small documentation refinements that reduce confusion for readers and automated tools
+A third priority contribution path is improving readability, structure, routing, and scientific precision across the repo.
 
-If you are unsure which lane your contribution belongs to, open a short issue first and describe the intended change and the target file.
+This lane is especially important because WFGY is no longer a single page.  
+It is a multi-layer public system, and clear navigation matters.
 
-### Review expectations
+Typical contributions in this lane include:
+
+* wording and clarity improvements
+* typo fixes
+* broken link fixes
+* section-title improvements
+* page-routing fixes
+* structural improvements that help new readers understand where to start
+* edits that reduce overstatement or strengthen scope boundaries
+
+This lane also includes small wording corrections that improve scientific rigor.
+
+If a phrase is too broad, too casual, too inflated, or too ambiguous, it is reasonable to propose a fix.
+
+---
+
+## Small fixes are real contributions
+
+Not every useful contribution is a feature, experiment, or major page.
+
+These also count:
+
+* fixing one misleading sentence
+* tightening one weak paragraph
+* replacing one broken or low-quality link
+* correcting one category label
+* improving one reading path
+* removing one overclaim
+* making one page easier to audit
+
+This repository treats clarity, restraint, and structure as real work.
+
+---
+
+## How to contribute
+
+### 1. Use the issue templates when possible
+
+This repository provides issue templates for several common contribution paths, including:
+
+* recognition updates
+* documentation and navigation improvements
+* bug reports
+* feature requests
+* questions or help
+
+Use the closest matching template when possible.
+
+If none of the templates fit, a blank issue is still acceptable.  
+Just explain clearly what you want to change and why the existing templates do not fit.
+
+### 2. Open a focused issue first when the change is non-trivial
+
+If your change affects structure, categorization, routing, collaboration language, proof interpretation, or multiple pages, open a short issue first.
+
+That makes review faster and reduces unnecessary rework.
+
+### 3. Submit a narrow PR
+
+Please keep PRs focused.
+
+A good PR in this repository usually does one of the following:
+
+* improves one page or one group of closely related pages
+* adds one new evidence item with proof
+* fixes one navigation problem
+* clarifies one structural boundary
+* improves one contribution or workflow surface
+
+Narrow PRs are easier to review and easier to trust.
+
+---
+
+## Review expectations
 
 To keep contributions aligned with scientific practice and public auditability:
 
-- keep scope narrow and assumptions explicit
-- avoid exaggerated claims, especially for early MVP work
-- prefer verifiable links and reproducible steps over broad statements
-- for recognition entries, include a public proof link whenever possible
+* keep scope narrow
+* make assumptions explicit
+* prefer verifiable links over broad statements
+* avoid exaggerated claims, especially for early MVP work
+* separate observation from interpretation
+* state non-claims when needed
+* do not present mention-level evidence as adoption
+* do not present support as collaboration
+* do not present collaboration pages as proof of deployment
+
+For public proof updates, include a stable public source whenever possible.
+
+For docs and wording changes, optimize for clarity, precision, and lower reader confusion.
+
+---
+
+## Evidence standard
+
+When contributing to public proof pages, use disciplined reading.
+
+Examples:
+
+* a merged documentation PR is not automatically paid adoption
+* a citation is not the same as integration
+* a mention is not the same as production deployment
+* a packaging milestone is not the same as external validation
+
+If a case is useful but weak, it may still belong in the Recognition Map.  
+It does not automatically belong in Adopters or Case Evidence.
+
+Conservative reading is a feature, not a limitation.
+
+---
+
+## PR expectations
+
+A pull request should explain:
+
+* what changed
+* where it changed
+* why it matters
+* what it does not prove, if relevant
+
+If the PR touches public proof, recognition, adoption, collaboration, or ecosystem interpretation, keep claims especially disciplined.
+
+If the PR affects templates, docs, or routing, make sure links and destination pages are correct.
+
+---
+
+## What not to do
+
+Please avoid the following:
+
+* broad promotional rewrites
+* inflated claims without proof
+* vague benchmark language without inspectable references
+* mixing support language with collaboration language
+* mixing mention-level evidence with stronger adoption language
+* large multi-topic PRs without prior discussion
+* speculative claims presented as settled facts
+
+This repository prefers inspectable progress over dramatic wording.
+
+---
+
+## If you want collaboration instead of contribution
+
+If your goal is not a public contribution but a structured pilot, audit, or research-facing collaboration, use the collaboration path instead of the contribution path.
+
+Start here:
+
+* [Work with WFGY](./WORK_WITH_WFGY.md)
+* [Pilot Offer One-Pager](./PILOT_OFFER_ONE_PAGER.md)
+* [Sample Deliverable](./SAMPLE_DELIVERABLE.md)
+
+---
+
+## If you want to support the project
+
+If you want to support continued development financially or through other forms of public support, use the support path:
+
+* [Support WFGY](./SUPPORT.md)
+
+Support and contribution are both meaningful, but they are not the same thing.
+
+---
+
+## Final note
+
+This repository is maintained with a strong preference for scientific restraint.
+
+If you can help make WFGY more precise, more navigable, more verifiable, or easier to inspect, your contribution is welcome.
+
+That remains true whether you improve a major page, a public proof entry, a workflow template, or a single sentence.