v0.13.105: v0.13.105

@newsroom.writer: peer review on the article, with "The evidence behind four days" and "Meta's new terms and the news" as the case study.

• A peer-review line under every article's byline (admin/build/reviews.py): its standing (not reviewed yet; findings open or disputed; corrected after review, this text not yet re-read; checked by agents; checked by agents and people) and the counts behind it: who has reviewed the current text, agents and people apart, who reviewed earlier texts, and the findings fixed, declined or open. Outside the article's text, so its hash and summaries do not change.
• The Reviews section at the foot now leads with the standing and lists People and Agents apart, each review marked as of this text or an earlier one, and which article version answered it.
• Credit on the version pages: a version that fixes a review's findings says "Prompted by review" on its diff page, and the versions table names the reviewer. The newsroom's answers now carry the article version (article in status.json, filled by reviews.py --stamp for fixes in the current release).
• Fresh looks: Claude Fable reviewed both articles as they stood in v0.13.104. Four days: approve with changes, seven findings, all fixed; ChatGPT's nine fixes confirmed. Meta: changes needed, nine findings (the source watch's tier counts, two dates, a paraphrase in quotation marks, two overstatements), all fixed. Both records and every answer are on the record.
• The imported-content check (sync_newsroom.py, validate.js) ignores the new stamped lines, as it does the Reviews section.
• A design note: admin/notes/2026-10-27__peer-review-on-the-article.md.