feat(wiki): write north_reach inner ring wiki pages (batch 5)

Ten systems at hops 3-4: Wolf 359, New Ballarat, Johannsen's Star,
Tanegashima, Puerto Rivera, Lacaille, Okafor Station, Kampala Gate,
Singh's Landing, Uusi Vantaa. Includes Paula review fixes for
supply chain accuracy, topology cross-references, and wave_5
procedural culture framing. Updates naming guidelines in
cultural-migration-pressure.md.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

docs/design/cultural-migration-pressure.md

@@ -316,6 +316,8 @@ Cultural heritage should influence the *flavour* of a system's name, not make ev
 
 The heritage shows in the *type* of name — a Portuguese-heritage system might name itself after a local river using Portuguese, or after the founding captain's surname — not in every system being named after an Earth city. Aim for no more than 30-40% direct Earth-geography transplants along any given corridor. The rest should be a mix of the above categories.
 
+Bare singular names — a surname alone, a city name alone — feel like placeholders, not founding moments. People naming a star take it seriously. Prefer compound names that carry context: "Johannsen's Star" over "Johannsen," "Uusi Vantaa" over "Vantaa," "Puerto Rivera" over "Rivera," "Kampala Gate" over "Kampala." The modifier tells you something about the place or the people who named it — a topology, a language, an aspiration, a relationship to the original. Singular names work when the name itself is already evocative (Seiðrmaðr, Traagwater, Dokkum) or when the catalog designation stuck (Wolf 359, Kapteyn's Star). Note that a star is not a station — modifiers like "Station," "Port," or "Landing" name the whole system after one facility, which is a pars pro toto that happens naturally (the station was the first thing built, the name stuck) but should not be the default pattern. Mix facility-named systems with star-named ones ("Johannsen's Star"), geography-named ones ("New Ballarat"), and concept-named ones ("Seiðrmaðr").
+
 ### 6.4 What Exceptions Signal
 
 An exception should always tell a story, even if the player/reader never learns that story explicitly. The exception creates a question: why is this system different from its neighbors? That question should be answerable if someone investigates, even if the answer is buried in a company archive or a 400-year-old land grant record. Exceptions that exist for no reason undermine the setting's sense of depth. Exceptions that exist for historically plausible reasons reinforce it.