See below.

I came. I saw. I failed.

でも、いったいなに、おもしろいでしたよ。

[I hope that is right!]

I think the entry is already quite clear.  I don't see why this entry should be 
singled out for addition of romaji, and I really don't see how adding romaji would 
help in any case.

See below.

I appreciate your taking all this trouble over my submission. It is just a pity that the system does not allow you to include Japanese in the glosses.

Just one final thought before you close the discussion down. I know that you do not like using romaji, but would it be intolerable to include it in this case, for example: (e.g. "why in the world? (ittainaze)"), etc.

What you are raising is the issue of having examples of the use of 一体. That 一体なぜ is one such, rather than it being a formal dictionary entry. It's the same in GG5, etc.
In JMdict we are sticking with the appropriate (I think) choice of what actually are headwords, and having examples, such as 一体なぜ, separate. If you look up 一体 in WWWJDIC you'll see the example "一体どこで彼に会ったんだ。 Where on earth did you meet him?". Normally we try and have one example per sense, but I have just flagged "いったいなぜ彼を駅に連れて行ったの？" as well (it will appear in a week, as Tatoeba's downloads are prepared weekly.)

See below.

Thank you for giving the time to explain your stand on this matter. I appreciate that because I am the novice here and I am keen to understand the complexities of the Japanese language. As I slowly work my way through Japanese text, looking for starting points and ending points of the sentence structure, I am motivated to search your site for help. When my initial search criteria does not give me any assistance, I try all sorts of other searches and sometimes I find the answer. In that way, when I have found the answer, I make a submission because I think that it may help another novice on the same route.

As to this submission, it is true that many examples of the Japanese “string of text symbols” can be found in the example sentences in the Tanaka corpus and that is, of course, some help, but they do not necessarily help with the definitive meaning of the particular “string of text symbols”, nor do they specifically help one to discover where a “headword” will start or stop so that individual entries can be analysed. In short, as between Japanese and English it often goes from idiom to idiom.

I think that it is the word “dictionary” in the context of a language like Japanese which is the hub of the problem. In English, expressions like “what on earth”, are no problem because there are three individual words in a string. Each of these words can be looked up. If I look them up in turn, in any order, e.g., "earth" first, I get the individual meanings, but I accept that I do not get a headword in the dictionary which is “what on earth”. However, [popping in to the library on my roaming] if I look up the word “earth” and read what it states, then – for example in Collins English Dictionary – I find one meaning as this: used as an intensifier in such phrases as “what on earth”, “who on earth”, etc.. Now, that matches what is in your site, except that I cannot look up the individual words for “what on earth”, etc., in Japanese; unless I already know them.

In the Japanese dictionary,“shogakukan”, it carries a link between the headwords “いったいぜんたい” and “いったい”. Likewise on your site, namely:-

一体全体; いったい全体 【いったいぜんたい】 (adv) (emph. form of 一体) ... the heck (e.g. "what the heck?"); ... in the world (e.g. "why in the world?"); ... on earth (e.g. "who on earth?")

However, in shogakukan it gives more. Under the headword “いったい” it gives “一体なぜ....” with the meaning “Why on earth ….”. Thus, like the English dictionary, with that clue, I can look up “なぜ” and see what it means. Also, under the headword “いったいぜんたい” it gives “一体全体どうした....” with a meaning of “What on earth....”, again, if necessary, I can look up “どうした” for its meaning.

My only point is this: that you have taken one helpful step on the road, namely: as in the English dictionary as noted above, by giving English meanings associated with the headword. However, I will not say, “What on earth stops you from including the “いったいなに”, “いったいなせ”, etc.” because I can imagine that a line has to be drawn somewhere; and, of course, you have also explained the mechanics of the system which prevent a simple inclusion under the main “headword”. However, the inclusion of the other expressions individually, which have already been included in English by description, would make it clear to the novice. In addition, it would even make clearer the usage in the helpful sentences in the Tanaka corpus.

I really have to agree with Rene. I think this has been pushed as far as it can go.

I still don't understand why things like いったいなに need to be added.  It's 
just standard use of an adverb.  I would never expect "why on earth" to appear 
in an English-English dictionary, nor いったいなに in a Japanese-Japanese 
dictionary, so why add it to this Japanese-English dictionary itself?  There are 
plenty of example sentences in the Tanaka corpus that give this exact 
example.  I'm not even convinced that 「いったいなに」 gets the parsing of the 
sentence correct in something like 「君は一体何を言おうとしているのか。」I'd 
guess that 一体 applies to 何を言おうとしているのか, not just to 何.

See below.

Thank you for posing that as a question.

To have an expert state the obvious is the basic dream of the novice who does not understand. Unfortunately, the novice usually gets the so called “obvious” from the non-expert; in short, most of the ordinary people who actually speak the language in question. In my own tongue [English], would I believe the general speaker of my tongue when I am told the meaning of some expression? Fortunately, when the language is used in a general context, understanding is easier for the native speaker. However, when the language is used in a specific context of some importance, we often have the great brains of the courtrooms arguing over the meaning.

I have come to regard your site as the living proof of the benefit of having your experts holding discussion over the meaning and understanding of the Japanese language. Moreover, you are not tied to the long delays of the printed published word, e.g., like the OED with 20 odd volumes. When I last exchanged a note with the editors on the meaning of the word “adversarial” and its first usage, they said that my comment was timely because they were just about to start again at “A” and again work their way through to “Z”. The cycle takes years to complete. However, as I understand it, I am sure that they revel in stating the obvious, so much so, that the big OED is, in my view, the dictionary where every beginner should start; unfortunately, the shear size is is the frightener for the novice. 

With your site, sized impedes no one because the overall size is not so obvious to anyone, save those who have created it. So, for my part, to the extent which time and facilities allow you to state the obvious, every novice who searches will applaud your work with equal measure.

Those verb conjugations are machine-generated, and only appear in WWWJDIC. 
Yes, I could put things like:
一体何;一体なに [いったいなに] /(exp) (See 一体)/
but isn't it just stating the obvious? There are a heap of Japanese words (全然, 全部, 本当, etc.) which do similar things.

See below.

I think that I am beginning to understand the situation a little better. Upon reading your comments, I am wondering whether you could deal with the Japanese in a similar manner as you do with various verb endings, for example: すれば seeする. Thus, we would get an entry which reads: 一体なに (いったいなに) see 一体, etc. for each of the variables. In this way, when someone searches for “一体なに”, they will find what they are looking for and then they can click on the cross-reference and find themselves reading your main explanations under “一体” and the result would be clear to most if not all.
I hope that is helpful.

The reason being that legacy programs using the old EDICT format can't cope with Japanese in glosses. That's part of the reason for the <<notes>>.
I'm going to reverse Rene's ordering. The Tanaka sentences have 133 examples for 一体/いったい and 132 of them are for the sense we are discussing. I'd have to renumber all the sense tags (can be done), but really with this sense dominating in modern Japanese, it should be first, regardless of what the 国語s say.
I'm also changing the "exemplar" example in WWWJDIC to a better one. And I'm adding an example sentence for 一体に.

@@ -16,0 +16,7 @@
+<sense>
+<pos>&adv;</pos>
+<s_inf>before an interrogative, forms an emphatic question</s_inf>
+<gloss>...the heck (e.g. "what the heck?")</gloss>
+<gloss>...in the world (e.g. "why in the world?")</gloss>
+<gloss>...on earth (e.g. "who on earth?")</gloss>
+</sense>
@@ -37,7 +44,0 @@
-<sense>
-<pos>&adv;</pos>
-<s_inf>before an interrogative, forms an emphatic question</s_inf>
-<gloss>...the heck (e.g. "what the heck?")</gloss>
-<gloss>...in the world (e.g. "why in the world?")</gloss>
-<gloss>...on earth (e.g. "who on earth?")</gloss>
-</sense>

Japanese cannot be added to glosses.

See below.

That looks good, but would it not be possible to include the Japanese reading for each "e.g" [e.g. "what the heck?" (一体なに))] so that what is clear to the expert would also be clear to the novice?

This was in response to Francis's comment:
I can see where you are coming from in your comment "I've come round to the view that just one of quite a lot of 一体 + XXX constructions" in respect of my rejected submission for "一体なせ".
In view of that, I am wondering if this main entry could have the addition of an explanation like the following:-
gives the expressions like:...the heck, …the world, ...on earth, and followed by various question words, like, なに,　なせ,　どれ, in order to give (e.g. "what the heck?"); (e.g. "why in the world?"); (e.g. "who on earth?")
Something like that may help the novice who is searching for such expressions.

some kind of note is fine with me, although i think the glosses as given are 
sufficiently obvious.  but if it's included, i think the senses should be swapped 
so that it doesn't look like the note applies to the whole word.  the new ordering 
matches the sense ordering of kokugo dictionaries and progressive waei.  
hopefully that wouldn't mess with paul's stuff too much

@@ -16,7 +16,0 @@
-<sense>
-<pos>&adv;</pos>
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
-<gloss>...the heck (e.g. "what the heck?")</gloss>
-<gloss>...in the world (e.g. "why in the world?")</gloss>
-<gloss>...on earth (e.g. "who on earth?")</gloss>
-</sense>
@@ -39,1 +32,1 @@
-<pos>&adv;</pos>
+<pos>&n-adv;</pos>
@@ -44,0 +37,7 @@
+<sense>
+<pos>&adv;</pos>
+<s_inf>before an interrogative, forms an emphatic question</s_inf>
+<gloss>...the heck (e.g. "what the heck?")</gloss>
+<gloss>...in the world (e.g. "why in the world?")</gloss>
+<gloss>...on earth (e.g. "who on earth?")</gloss>
+</sense>

Tanaka: 124 一度, 61 １度, 6 いちど, 2 ひとたび
ngrams:
一度	27560777
一たび	15316
ひと度	2402
一とたび	51

@@ -10 +10 @@
-<keb>ひと度</keb>
+<keb>１度</keb>
@@ -13,0 +14,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>ひと度</keb>

See rejected 2610740. 一たび is in WWW pages and Eijiro.

@@ -11,0 +11,7 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>一たび</keb>
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>一とたび</keb>
+<ke_inf>&io;</ke_inf>

ブイ‐ティー‐アール	 【VTR】	
１ 《 videotape recorder 》ビデオテープレコーダーのこと。
２ 転じて、ビデオカメラで撮影された映像のこと。録画。ビデオ。「もう一度―で確認してみましょう」
◆2は、ビデオテープに限らず、DVDや他の媒体に保存された動画映像全般をさす。
http://kotobank.jp/word/VTR
.
You can hear VTR used in sense #2 in the following video, at 1 min. 23 sec.
http://hu-gee.jp/detail/senryu03.html

@@ -19,0 +20,4 @@
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>video recording</gloss>
+</sense>

@@ -4,0 +4,3 @@
+<k_ele>
+<keb>ＶＴＲ</keb>
+</k_ele>
@@ -9,0 +12,1 @@
+<re_inf>&ik;</re_inf>
@@ -12,2 +16,3 @@
-<gloss>Video Tape Recorder</gloss>
-<gloss>VCR</gloss>
+<xref type="see" seq="1105480">ビデオテープレコーダー</xref>
+<gloss>videotape recorder</gloss>
+<gloss>VTR</gloss>

Entry created

Entry created

OK, I'll drop the rhetorical, as it's not really rhetoric.

@@ -13,2 +13,2 @@
-<gloss>used to create a rhetorical question indicating that the speaker actually believes the opposite is true</gloss>
-<gloss>emphasizes a determination not to do something by means of a rhetorical question</gloss>
+<gloss>used to create a form of question indicating that the speaker actually believes the opposite is true</gloss>
+<gloss>emphasizes a determination not to do something, e.g. "Like hell I will!"</gloss>

See below.

Yes, you are correct on that point.

As we all know, we are trying to understand another language based upon the tools which we already possess. When we come to use "rhetorical question" to explain something, we know [or discover - if we did not know already] that the English dictionary tells us that it means "a question to which no answer is required".

It is a natural danger of the learning process that the student quickly spots that the most prominent words in the search are "ものか；もんか" and "rhetorical question".

Those are the words which tend to stick in the mind [indeed, to a degree we are all driven by key words - hence many of the disputes which arise out of contracts are often caused by the effect of the key words, as opposed to the totality of meaning contained in the terms and conditions].

In some respects, for the benefit of the student [and perhaps most of us too] everyday key words should be avoided where possible, thus, forcing he student to read the "small print" so to speak. If you are happy to change the meaning on this one, perhaps I could suggest a "brain stopping" word in the gloss, e.g.,

used to create a rhetorical question, but only in circumstances where the speaker actually believes the opposite is true; thus, emphasizing a determination by the speaker for the listeners not to do something by means of a rhetorical question

Apologies for the rambling!

Francis, aren't you making a case based on the English meaning of a "rhetorical question" rather than on what the Japanese terms ものか/もんか mean? I'd be happy to extend the entry based on evidence of the latter.

see below.

I have not made an amendment above because I don't want to bluntly oppose your views. However, although Rene's example may be typical, that does not take away from the point of my submission. If, in fact, the Japanese reading means only a situation where the speaker believes the opposite to what is said, then perhaps the gloss of a "rhetorical" should not be used. For example, the following would be a rhetorical question:-

[A manager is with his team of football players just prior to an important match and he says to the team], "Well lads, we've trained hard for this important match, we're going out there to give them all  we've got; and, are we going to win?

If the answer of that rhetorical question had to be "no" by definition, then I submit to Rene's example. However, it seems to me, as I stated before, the rhetorical question is one where the answer is obvious, be it positive or negative. Although, one has to say that the negative is frequently used in sarcasm, abuse and rowdy gatherings, like the old labour struggles of the UK, e.g., at the end of a speech, “Are we going to let the employers win this one?” However, the end rhetorical question may also be, “Are we all united in this fight?

Chino "All About Particles"

I agree that the original seems OK. I've restored it, and added Chino's version. She flags this as "masc" and the です versions as "fem".

@@ -12,1 +12,3 @@
-<gloss>used to create a rhetorical question indicating that the speaker actually believes the answer is so obvious that a response is not necessary. It is used both where the speaker is asserting something or opposing something.</gloss>
+<misc>&male;</misc>
+<gloss>used to create a rhetorical question indicating that the speaker actually believes the opposite is true</gloss>
+<gloss>emphasizes a determination not to do something by means of a rhetorical question</gloss>

-quoting Naoko Chino's 'All About Particles':
"[ものか/もんか] emphasizes a determination not to do something by means of 
a rhetorical question"
-quoting Meikyo:
「強く否定する気持ちを表す」, e.g. 「こんなに晴れているのに、雨なんか降るもん
か」
-I'm not sure how the original does not reflect the nature of a rhetorical 
question.  If I said "C'mon, is Sarah Palin _really_ smart?" that would seem to 
fit the bill here as an appropriate rhetorical question.

See below.

The original entry does not reflect the nature of a "rhetorical question". 

PS
I am not sure if I have done this entry correctly because the result seems to show that the original meaning is crossed-referenced in some way. Apologies if I have made the wrong approach on this entry.

@@ -12,1 +12,1 @@
-<gloss>used to create a rhetorical question indicating that the speaker actually believes the opposite is true</gloss>
+<gloss>used to create a rhetorical question indicating that the speaker actually believes the answer is so obvious that a response is not necessary. It is used both where the speaker is asserting something or opposing something.</gloss>

Entry created

Activated the xref for sense 6 after adding the missing term to the database

@@ -36,1 +36,1 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2610350">地域社会的企業</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2610810">地域社会的企業</xref>

koj, daijr, daijs, eij

@@ -8,1 +8,1 @@
-<reb>シー・ビー</reb>
+<reb>シービー</reb>
@@ -12,1 +12,25 @@
-<xref type="see">地域社会的企業</xref>
+<gloss>Citizens' Band</gloss>
+<gloss>CB (radio)</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="1704230">転換社債</xref>
+<gloss>convertible bond</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="2129140">慢性気管支炎</xref>
+<gloss>chronic bronchitis</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>chemical and biological (weapons)</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="2610410">センターバック</xref>
+<gloss>center back</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="2610350">地域社会的企業</xref>

http://www.tohoku-sb.jp/
http://www.chugoku-cb-sb.net/
http://www.sofi.jp/portal/7.html
http://www.ageconcern-japan.org/cb/cb_org.htm