Expose versioned enrichment provenance and distinguish report, project and date metadata

A download from the underlying FLoRA source does not by itself reproduce all displayed reproduction outcomes: some source values are NA while the explorer enriches the display from additional sources. The relationship should be independently traceable.

Acceptance criteria:

- Publish snapshot identifiers, source/enrichment versions and transformations with immutable source links; include them in exports and a concise Data and methods disclosure.
- Document whether year fields mean first public report, DOI registration or formal publication; distinguish date types where data support this.
- Review the Alves reproduction of `10.1177/0956797618756862`: DOI `10.17605/osf.io/vndky` points to the project, direct report URL is https://osf.io/k85qc, and older OSF files coexist with a 2026 DOI date. This is a date-semantics question, not a confirmed incorrect year.
- Distinguish Project and materials from Read reproduction report. The accompanying patch makes mobile report-title links prefer the same supplied report URL as desktop evidence; both destinations should ultimately remain explicitly available.
- Investigate literal author ellipsis in the Alves record (family name rendered as … Hanel), fixing source metadata rather than silently changing identities in the frontend.

Coordinate source changes with forrtproject/fred-data; retain an audit trail.

Start with the Alves reproduction and compare the project DOI, direct report URL, dates, author metadata, and desktop/mobile report links described in the issue. Coordinate source changes with forrtproject/fred-data, then verify that exports and the Data and methods disclosure expose immutable snapshots, source and enrichment versions, transformations, date types, and both project and report destinations with an audit trail.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.