Decide fate of 4 unlanded docs + 6 dormant upstream-* branches

[WilfordGrimley]

4 single-file doc/report branches never PR'd (claude/frontend-polish-review-52vy6h, assets/whatsthat-branding, claude/ui-content-audit-docs, claude/extractable-primitives-ledger-08cik4) and 6 dormant upstream-fix-/upstream-feat- branches with real multi-file content, never PR'd anywhere (consistent with the upstream-deprioritized stance). Owner call: PR them, or explicitly mark discarded. See docs/reports/2026-07-19-reconciliation-sweep.md, open item 5.

[WilfordGrimley]

Owner decision 2026-07-19, splitting this issue's two halves: (1) the 6 dormant upstream-* branches STAY DORMANT until the federation-pitch reply — that gating is their design, no action; (2) the 4 unlanded docs get one worker pass to either land or close with stated reasons — queued on the docs lane behind #156 (in flight). The report-relay spot-check (#142) remains a separate open owner decision.

[WilfordGrimley]

Worker pass on the unlanded-docs half of this issue only (owner's 2026-07-19 split decision, comment above) — the 6 dormant upstream-* branches were not touched, assessed, or mentioned as pending, per that ruling.

Branch/PR: unlanded-docs-pass-ac5bad6f → draft PR #193 (not merged).

branch	tip SHA	classification	evidence / reason	landed-where or question
claude/frontend-polish-review-52vy6h	d5716d06	CLOSE WITH REASONS	Single-commit frontend/.gitignore change. Its tests/survey-tmp/ anchoring is already superseded — master picked up an equivalent ignore rule via a later, larger PR (#41). The other hunk adds a .env.sentry-build-plugin ignore line, but this fork's frontend has no Sentry dependency at all (fully removed per this repo's zero-telemetry posture) — that line guards a file that can never be produced. Nothing left to land.	n/a — nothing landed
assets/whatsthat-branding	c611a0de	CLOSE WITH REASONS	3 raw SVGs (composite.svg, question-mark.svg, wordmark.svg) + a README, added via GitHub-web "Add files via upload" (misplaced at repo root, not the frontend/src/assets/whatsthat/ dir its own README describes). Byte-diffed these against frontend/public/whatsthat-{composite,mark,wordmark}.svg currently in master: identical content (only trailing-newline differences). Already landed and wired into frontend/src/pages/whatsthat.tsx via PR #114 (merged 2026-07-19), whose description explicitly credits this branch as the source. Fully superseded by an already-shipped PR.	Already landed via #114 — nothing further to do
claude/ui-content-audit-docs	9800742b	CLOSE WITH REASONS	This is a stale, disposition-less duplicate of docs/audits/ui-content-audit.md. The real version of this audit landed via a different, similarly-named branch (claude/ui-content-audit, PR #56, merged 2026-07-18), then got fully built out via PR #64 (merged 2026-07-18): 11 of 12 findings shipped in code, #11 got a documented process fix instead. Spot-checked several findings directly against current master — all confirmed fixed (e.g. QuestionFeed.tsx's own code comment now reads "the subcounts line dropped fresh entirely - see the audit note above", i.e. the code literally cites this audit as already resolved). Landing this branch's copy would regress docs/audits/ui-content-audit.md to an earlier, less-informative version (no Disposition column). Found in the process: docs/MANIFEST.md's and docs/README.md's own audits/ entries were themselves stale (still described the audit as "unmerged"/awaiting a disposition column) — fixed in PR #193 as a follow-up commit.	Superseded by #56 + #64, already in master with full disposition table
claude/extractable-primitives-ledger-08cik4	09451b72	LAND	Repo-wide "extractable-primitives" ledger (docs/upstreaming/extractable-primitives.md, HOLD/owner-review) + a mechanical CI tether (check_extractable_primitives_tether() in docs_lint.py) verifying every row marked CLEAN doesn't actually import a fork-only module, + a CLAUDE.md convention line + its own session report. Verified: no conflicting changes to docs_lint.py/CLAUDE.md/docs/README.md landed in master since this branch's fork point; python3 .github/scripts/docs_lint.py runs clean against current master with this content applied; no drift-list figures (~19.5h/~20h/3.0/s/"12h fetch floor") quoted anywhere in the ledger or its report, so no staleness risk there. Cherry-picked as 2 commits (seed + report), plus a follow-up commit (MANIFEST.md row + the audits/ cross-reference fix above) and a final formatting-only commit (black/prettier reformatting the cherry-picked files to satisfy this repo's pre-commit hooks) - 4 commits total on PR #193, one logical change each. wiki-publish-map.json: deliberately left out while the doc is HOLD, same reasoning documentation-process.md gives for excluding docs/proposals/ — stated explicitly in PR #193, not left as a silent gap. Note on #174 linkage: public issue #174 ("Extractable-primitives follow-ups") references this same branch/doc — landing it here does not resolve #174, which stays open as its own follow-up-tracking issue.	Landed via draft PR #193, docs/upstreaming/extractable-primitives.md (+ MANIFEST.md row)

Branch deletion is intentionally not part of this pass (feeds a later cleanup pass, per this repo's merge-duty convention). Issue #144 itself is not being closed — its upstream-* half stays open per the owner's split ruling.