feat: establish standalone Argand Site Registry

CONTRIBUTING.md

@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+# Contributing
+
+Explain the observed problem and the proposed behavior in an issue or pull request.
+Include a small authored fixture that reproduces a correctness or security failure.
+Keep each module focused, preserve existing Rust style and run `bash scripts/check.sh`
+after `cargo fetch --locked`. Changes to contracts or normalization need a documented
+migration and proof that stale approvals cannot silently survive changed evidence.
+
+## Code and dependency changes
+
+Submit code you are authorized to contribute under AGPL-3.0-or-later. Preserve
+copyright/license notices for reused material and identify its origin. Do not
+submit private datasets, credentials, signing keys, production configuration or
+real user query logs. Synthetic fixtures should say that they are synthetic.
+
+Dependency changes must include the lockfile diff, reason, source/license review
+and complete offline gates. Keep builds practical on limited CPU and memory.
+Do not replace an existing algorithm or lower a threshold simply to pass a test.
+
+## Source adapters and website corrections
+
+A new source requires primary documentation of commercial reuse rights, exact
+consumed fields, required attribution, documented current format and distribution
+URLs. Add a common-interface adapter, bounded streaming/resume behavior, input
+validation and adversarial fixtures. Update LICENSE_SOURCES and attribution before
+acceptance. An attractive dataset with unverified terms is not admissible.
+
+For a website correction, include the entity ID, exact URL, relation/role, country
+or locale scope, source record/revision, conflicting claims and dated immutable
+evidence. Explain how the evidence supports identity and scope. Popularity, TLS,
+hostname resemblance and an unauthenticated ownership claim are insufficient alone.
+Do not include executable HTML, authenticated sessions or unnecessary personal data.
+
+Submissions are proposals. The software repository does not contain a production
+approval log or publisher keys. A publisher must independently review evidence,
+append an expiring decision, build and inspect the candidate, then sign and activate
+it under its own trust policy. Source changes cannot silently renew an approval.
+
+Disclose relevant ownership or commercial conflicts. A reviewer should not approve
+their own disputed website claim. Explain disagreements with evidence; preserve
+prior decisions and corrections. Report exploitable failures through SECURITY.md.