feat(gate): two presentation checks the evidence actually supports

Adversarial deep research (25 sources, 124 claims extracted, 25 verified:
11 confirmed / 14 refuted) plus direct measurement of all 18 cloned open/
repos. The useful half of the result is what it REFUSED to support, so the
research is recorded in docs/presentation-research-2026-08-03.md rather than
being spent and forgotten.

- BADGE-COUNT (WARN) — past five badges. Trockman et al., ICSE 2018
  (n=294,941 npm packages) measured a non-linear relationship with popularity
  inflecting at five, motivated by surveyed maintainers calling over-badged
  READMEs cluttered and "trying too hard". WARN and never ERROR: the
  coefficient sits in an appendix with no CI or p-value. Counting deliberately
  uses a NARROWER rule than the existing claim check, so a screenshot or an
  architecture diagram is never counted as clutter. Fires on 8 of 18.
- README-LANGUAGE (WARN) — prose not in the language this repo's readers were
  declared to speak, via a new `locales` axis in the register. Class is
  structural, a trait is what the code DOES, a locale is who it is FOR — the
  standard's own "who the reader is decides what is required". English is the
  default; ms-ai-architect and okr are declared nb, named by the operator as
  Norway-only in audience. Stopword-frequency comparison over prose with code
  stripped: a Norwegian flag name in a shell example cannot decide the
  document. Fires on exactly those two, silent on all sixteen English repos.

One design correction found mid-implementation: the first version returned
SKIP when a README had too little prose to judge, which broke a passing
fixture and would have stopped any terse repo from ever reaching OK. SKIP is
for a check that could not RUN; this one ran, saw everything and found no
prose to be in the wrong language — the same shape as "no licence claim to
back". Insufficient prose is now OK, and evenly bilingual prose is the SKIP,
because there the question is live and unanswered.

Deliberately NOT built, because the evidence does not reach: any rule about
images, diagrams or terminal recordings (every such claim refuted 0-3); a
README length bound (no evidence-based target exists); a section count (would
fire on 9 of 18 — textbook "suspect the CHECK"); Mermaid source length and
#gh-dark-mode-only (zero occurrences, and the instance limit is not readable
via the API, so any threshold would be a guess).

Verified live against the operator's own forge (15.0.6+gitea-1.22.0): Mermaid
DOES render in README.md — two div.mermaid-block iframes carrying real SVG —
while #gh-dark-mode-only landed only in Gitea 1.26.0 and is unavailable here.

103 tests green, up from 92. No version bump: the catalog ref still trails at
v0.1.1 against 0.1.3, and starting a second release chain over that is the
operator's call.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TCAGKZT8h9F46ygzSkhEee

README.md

@@ -67,6 +67,8 @@ The repository's **class** decides what each check means:
 | Relative links | a link points at a file that is not tracked |
 | Licence claim | the README cites a licence the repo has no file for |
 | Badges | a static image badge — any host — asserts a test, build or coverage run that nothing verifies |
+| Badge count | more than five badges, the inflection measured by Trockman et al. (ICSE 2018) past which a badge row reads as clutter rather than as evidence. `WARN` only — the source cannot carry a hard limit |
+| README language | the prose is not in the language this repo's readers were declared to speak |
 | Boilerplate | template text nobody filled in |
 | Version consistency | manifest, README badge, newest CHANGELOG entry and the git tag disagree |
 | Description | empty, or past the length bound |
@@ -90,6 +92,22 @@ untrusted input: a `SECURITY.md` with a real disclosure channel, and a
 `## Known limitations` section. Traits live in the register and are the
 maintainer's judgement, not a reading.
 
+### Locales — a third axis
+
+Class is structural, a trait is what the code *does*, and a locale is who the
+code is *for*. English is the default and is not listed. A repo aimed only at a
+Norwegian readership is declared `nb` in the register, and is then wrong in
+English rather than right — the standard's own principle is that who the reader
+is decides what is required, and language is the first thing that decides.
+
+Detection is a stopword-frequency comparison over prose with code stripped, so a
+Norwegian flag name in a shell example cannot decide what the document is. It
+answers which language dominates and nothing else: a README can pass this and
+still be badly written. Where the prose is too evenly bilingual to call, the
+finding is a `SKIP` — the question is live and unanswered. Where there is no
+running prose at all, it is an `OK`: nothing claims a language, and a thin README
+is the first-screen check's business, not this one's.
+
 ### What is deliberately not required
 
 `CONTRIBUTING.md`, `CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md` and `MAINTAINERS.md` are required by no
@@ -149,7 +167,7 @@ without that, a raw scan turns three dead names into about twenty.
 npm test
 ```
 
-84 tests over the pure classifiers. The reference fixtures are measured false
+103 tests over the pure classifiers. The reference fixtures are measured false
 positives, each with its expected verdict — the six that produced the
 three-outcome reference rule, plus the noise sources found by running the gate
 against a real repository: regexes inside code spans that are markdown links to