@@ -19,0 +20 @@
+<gloss>no matter what (kind of)</gloss>
@@ -21 +21,0 @@
-<gloss>no matter what (kind of)</gloss>

gg5, prog, daij

@@ -10 +9,0 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1000590">あんな</xref>
@@ -12,0 +12,3 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1000590">あんな</xref>
+<gloss>what kind of</gloss>
+<gloss>what sort of</gloss>
@@ -14 +15,0 @@
-<gloss>what kind of</gloss>
@@ -18,2 +19,5 @@
-<s_inf>as どんな...も</s_inf>
-<gloss>any(body, thing, means, etc.)</gloss>
+<s_inf>as どんな...でも, どんな...も, etc.</s_inf>
+<gloss>whatever</gloss>
+<gloss>no matter what (kind of)</gloss>
+<gloss>any</gloss>
+<gloss>all</gloss>

wisdom

cleanup of second sense info

@@ -12 +11,0 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1000590">あんな</xref>
@@ -21,2 +20,2 @@
-<s_inf>as in どんな人でも</s_inf>
-<gloss>(with -temo, demo, etc.) any(body, thing, means, etc.)</gloss>
+<s_inf>as どんな...も</s_inf>
+<gloss>any(body, thing, means, etc.)</gloss>

GG5

Needs the second sense, but hard to word.

@@ -16,0 +16,5 @@
+<sense>
+<pos>&adj-pn;</pos>
+<s_inf>as in どんな人でも</s_inf>
+<gloss>(with -temo, demo, etc.) any(body, thing, means, etc.)</gloss>
+</sense>

Link to general sushi sense

@@ -20,0 +20,1 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1790360">押し寿司</xref>

Link to kango syn: 旅券

@@ -11,0 +11,1 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1553160">旅券</xref>

Looks ok.

I think we need a "to be interested in: to be curious about" sense. This usage is extremely common and it doesn't have the negative nuance of sense 1.
I also think this can replace the "fancy; like" sense. I asked 3 native speakers about the "物事がそんなにゆっくり変化する世界は気にならない" sentence and they all agreed that 気にならない should be 気に入らない.
I suggest replacing it with this sentence: "これらの絵でどれか気になるものはありますか"
I've moved the "feel like doing" sense down so those sentence will also need to be retagged.

@@ -12 +11,0 @@
-<pos>&vi;</pos>
@@ -14,2 +13,4 @@
-<gloss>to be on one's mind</gloss>
-<gloss>to worry one</gloss>
+<gloss>to weigh on one's mind</gloss>
+<gloss>to bother one</gloss>
+<gloss>to worry about</gloss>
+<gloss>to be concerned about</gloss>
@@ -17 +17,0 @@
-<gloss>to be bothered by</gloss>
@@ -20 +19,0 @@
-<gloss>to be curious about</gloss>
@@ -24 +22,0 @@
-<pos>&vi;</pos>
@@ -26,2 +24,4 @@
-<gloss>to feel like</gloss>
-<gloss>to feel inclined to</gloss>
+<gloss>to be interested (in)</gloss>
+<gloss>to be curious (about)</gloss>
+<gloss>to wonder (about)</gloss>
+<gloss>to catch one's eye</gloss>
@@ -31 +30,0 @@
-<pos>&vi;</pos>
@@ -33,3 +32,4 @@
-<gloss>to fancy</gloss>
-<gloss>to like</gloss>
-<gloss>to catch one's eye</gloss>
+<s_inf>usu. after a verb</s_inf>
+<gloss>to feel like (doing)</gloss>
+<gloss>to feel inclined to</gloss>
+<gloss>to bring oneself to (do)</gloss>

I think it's OK for sense 1.

@@ -19,0 +20 @@
+<gloss>to be curious about</gloss>

tanaka:
彼の帰りの遅いのが気になる。
I wonder why he is late.
手ごろなアパートがあると聞いて、それが気になった。
I pricked up my ears when I heard of the available apartment. (Sense 3)

I'd add 'to be curious' ('I'd like to know') but I don't feel it really fits the first sense as the glosses are so negative
「わたし、気になります！」 was a catchphrase in Yonezawa Honobu's 氷菓

@@ -25 +25,2 @@
-<gloss>to feel inclined</gloss>
+<gloss>to feel like</gloss>
+<gloss>to feel inclined to</gloss>

Thanks. I've sense-tagged them in Tatoeba, and flagged the 4th one to show up in-line in WWWJDIC.
You can search for sentences in Tatoeba:
- in Tatoeba's own pages - there a search link at the top of most pages.
- in WWWJDIC, where there's an "Example Search" page.

gg5, prog, meikyo

I don't think "climate" is right. The JEs don't have it.
I don't think the 天気 x-ref is needed.

@@ -22,4 +22 @@
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
-<xref type="see" seq="1438690">天気・1</xref>
-<gloss>weather</gloss>
-<gloss>climate</gloss>
+<gloss>weather (conditions)</gloss>
@@ -30 +27 @@
-<misc>&rare;</misc>
+<misc>&form;</misc>

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーーー─┬───────────┬───────╮
│ 気象　　 │ 3,595,068 │ 99.9% │
│ 氣象　　 │     2,082 │  0.1% │ 🡠 oK to sK
│ きしょう │    87,982 │  N/A  │
╰─ーーーー─┴───────────┴───────╯

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<ke_inf>&oK;</ke_inf>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>

2082 ngrams

use [oK] to indicate 旧字

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<ke_inf>&oK;</ke_inf>

mk

@@ -26,0 +27 @@
+<pos>&vi;</pos>

@@ -35,2 +35,2 @@
-<gloss>Excuse me</gloss>
-<gloss>Goodbye</gloss>
+<gloss>excuse me</gloss>
+<gloss>goodbye</gloss>

@@ -33,0 +34,2 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2276200">失礼します</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2276200">失礼します</xref>

GG5

Move “in accordance with” to separate 〜に entry (suffix).

@@ -18,0 +18,1 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2630530">にしたがって</xref>
@@ -21,1 +22,1 @@
-<gloss>in accordance with</gloss>
+<gloss>accordingly</gloss>

出来上がる	476497	70.3%
でき上がる	20859	3.1%
出来あがる	14956	2.2%
出来上る	2939	0.4%
できあがる	162957	24.0%
GG5, etc.

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
@@ -14,0 +16 @@
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
@@ -17,0 +20 @@
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
@@ -36,0 +40 @@
+<gloss>to get plastered</gloss>

Meikyo, sankoku, and obunsha have (俗) tags

@@ -34,0 +35 @@
+<misc>&col;</misc>

not needed

@@ -35 +34,0 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2080630">べろべろ・2</xref>

N-grams

@@ -11,3 +10,0 @@
-<keb>出来上る</keb>
-</k_ele>
-<k_ele>
@@ -17,0 +15,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>出来上る</keb>

@@ -14,0 +15,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>出来あがる</keb>

Probably harmless.

chujiten

Too many xrefs?

@@ -20,2 +20,3 @@
-<gloss>superior authorities</gloss>
-<gloss>boss</gloss>
+<gloss>(one's) superior</gloss>
+<gloss>(one's) boss</gloss>
+<gloss>the higher-ups</gloss>

Not really an "ant".

@@ -18,1 +18,1 @@
-<xref type="ant" seq="1499350">部下</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1499350">部下</xref>

ant, syn

@@ -18,0 +18,3 @@
+<xref type="ant" seq="1499350">部下</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1535490">目上</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1535490">目上</xref>

On reflection I agree.

@@ -23 +22,0 @@
-<misc>&euph;</misc>

I don't think [euph] is appropriate here.
Also, given that the first sense is "physiology", I don't think there's any particular reason to assume that "menstruation" is the original meaning.

For our second sense,
  iwakoku: 特に、月経の婉曲表現。「生理日」
  sankoku: もと「月経」の婉曲表現で、今はふつうに使う

Despite sankoku saying sense 02 is now ふつう, the [euph] tag might be useful to indicate that it's not the original meaning.

@@ -22,0 +23 @@
+<misc>&euph;</misc>

I don't see a need for these x-refs.
GG5 has "the elements" but I don't think it's a great gloss.

@@ -18,2 +17,0 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1002470">お天気・1</xref>
-<xref type="see" seq="1222270">気象・1</xref>
@@ -21 +18,0 @@
-<gloss>the elements</gloss>

@@ -18,1 +18,1 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1002470">お天気</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1002470">お天気・1</xref>

Link to 気象

@@ -19,0 +19,2 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1222270">気象・1</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1222270">気象・1</xref>

Not really an "ant".

@@ -18,2 +18,2 @@
-<xref type="ant" seq="1353260">上司</xref>
-<xref type="ant" seq="1353260">上司</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1353260">上司</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1353260">上司</xref>

ant, syn

@@ -18,0 +18,4 @@
+<xref type="ant" seq="1353260">上司</xref>
+<xref type="ant" seq="1353260">上司</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1535320">目下・めした</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1535320">目下・めした</xref>

As long as かたこと and へんげん have different definitions/glosses, I don't think we should be linking them.
ぺらぺら x-ref isn't necessary either.

@@ -21,3 +20,0 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1626540">片言・へんげん・1</xref>
-<xref type="see" seq="1011580">ぺらぺら・1</xref>
-<xref type="see" seq="1011580">ぺらぺら・1</xref>

eij

often written in katakana

@@ -13,0 +13,4 @@
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>カタコト</reb>
+<re_nokanji/>

It's not an "ant".

@@ -18,1 +18,1 @@
-<xref type="ant" seq="1011580">ぺらぺら・1</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1011580">ぺらぺら・1</xref>

OK. Splitting off なめ.

@@ -15,3 +14,0 @@
-</r_ele>
-<r_ele>
-<reb>なめ</reb>

gg5
無礼	218482
無礼な	62549
無礼を	30027
無礼が	3765
無礼さ	3377

We typically use noun glosses when noun usage is this common. I think なめ should be a separate obs-tagged entry; it's strictly adjectival.
Don't see a need for the x-ref.

@@ -19,0 +20 @@
+<pos>&n;</pos>
@@ -21,5 +22,4 @@
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<xref type="see" seq="1320230">失礼・1</xref>
-<xref type="see" seq="1320230">失礼・4</xref>
-<gloss>impolite</gloss>
-<gloss>rude</gloss>
+<gloss>rudeness</gloss>
+<gloss>impoliteness</gloss>
+<gloss>discourtesy</gloss>
+<gloss>insolence</gloss>

I'm inclined to wave it through.

koj daij nikk

not super contemporary based on the kokugo exmaples but appears in 森鴎外's writings so post-1868. then there's also the (perhaps limited) 
modern use of 無礼る for なめる.
all examples are なる/なり though, maybe it should be its own entry as adj-nari...?

@@ -14,0 +15,3 @@
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>なめ</reb>

gg5, prog, luminous, daij

Merging senses 3 and 4.

@@ -23 +22,0 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2132030">道に迷う</xref>
@@ -25,0 +25 @@
+<gloss>to go astray</gloss>
@@ -30 +29,0 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1641170">迷い・1</xref>
@@ -33 +32,5 @@
-<gloss>to be of two minds over</gloss>
+<gloss>to vacillate</gloss>
+<gloss>to be of two minds (about)</gloss>
+<gloss>to be unable to make up one's mind</gloss>
+<gloss>to not know what to do</gloss>
+<gloss>to be at a loss</gloss>
@@ -40,2 +43,7 @@
-<gloss>to give into temptation</gloss>
-<gloss>to lose control of oneself</gloss>
+<gloss>to be captivated (by)</gloss>
+<gloss>to be infatuated (with)</gloss>
+<gloss>to be charmed (by)</gloss>
+<gloss>to be carried away (by)</gloss>
+<gloss>to be blinded (by)</gloss>
+<gloss>to be lost (in)</gloss>
+<gloss>to lose oneself (to)</gloss>
@@ -46,9 +54,3 @@
-<gloss>to be charmed</gloss>
-<gloss>to be infatuated</gloss>
-<gloss>to be captivated</gloss>
-<gloss>to be smitten</gloss>
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<pos>&v5u;</pos>
-<pos>&vi;</pos>
-<gloss>to turn in one's grave</gloss>
+<gloss>to linger (of a departed soul)</gloss>
+<gloss>to be restless in one's grave</gloss>
+<gloss>to be unable to rest in peace</gloss>

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーー─┬───────────╮
│ 迷う　 │ 1,364,521 │
│ 紕う　 │         0 │ - rK (daijr)
│ まよう │    24,670 │
╰─ーーー─┴───────────╯

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>

@@ -23,0 +24 @@
+<gloss>to get lost</gloss>

Not really an "ant".

@@ -18,1 +18,1 @@
-<xref type="ant" seq="1535490">目上</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1535490">目上</xref>

ant, syn

@@ -18,0 +18,3 @@
+<xref type="ant" seq="1535490">目上</xref>
+<xref type="ant" seq="1535490">目上</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1499350">部下</xref>

Not really an "ant".

@@ -18,2 +18,2 @@
-<xref type="ant" seq="1535320">目下・めした</xref>
-<xref type="ant" seq="1535320">目下・めした</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1535320">目下・めした</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1535320">目下・めした</xref>

ant, syn

@@ -18,0 +18,2 @@
+<xref type="ant" seq="1535320">目下・めした</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1353260">上司</xref>

養う	650,303	99.8%	
養なう	1,187	0.2%

We don't use [io] if the form is hidden.

@@ -12 +11,0 @@
-<ke_inf>&io;</ke_inf>

http://kyoumu.office.uec.ac.jp/syllabus/2023/33/33_25222103.html

found it in one of my syllabi

@@ -8,0 +9,5 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>養なう</keb>
+<ke_inf>&io;</ke_inf>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>

All the 50+ Tanaka sentences seem to stay with sense 1.

prog, daijr/s

Split sense 1 into 3 senses. It was a bit long as one sense and I think this is much clearer.
Tanaka/Tatoeba sentences will probably have to be changed.
I don't think the x-ref is necessary.

@@ -19 +18,0 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1634100">養い・1</xref>
@@ -22,0 +22,4 @@
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&v5u;</pos>
+<pos>&vt;</pos>
@@ -26,0 +30,4 @@
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&v5u;</pos>
+<pos>&vt;</pos>
@@ -34,0 +42 @@
+<gloss>to foster</gloss>

Sense count: Daijr - 7, GG5 - 2, 中辞典 - 4, ルミナス - 3.
GG5 combines 2 & 3, 中辞典  splits 1, ルミナス splits 1 and misses 3.

They're all over the place. I think Rene's version is a good balance.

I've only skimmed the discussion but personally I still think "wanting" is better and more helpful than the original "wanted". As Jim and Alan seem content with this version as well, I think it's time to let this rest.

Apologies but I must insist that, for the reasons previously listed, it is the worst set out of the three.
I have thus far tried, without apparent success, to focus on the alternative glosses' merits. 
However, I think this point can also be made by trying to find the current gloss' merits instead.

For example, I once again bring up this: Assume all three candidates(wanting, want, wanted ) are all equally valid in regards to semantics and syntax and then try to translate a few sentences with ほしい using each of them - I think you will agree that the translations with the current gloss sound significantly more awkward than either of the rest.
This prompts the question: if they are all equally meritorious but 'wanting' has the singular demerit of being the most unnatural, what is it that makes it the most suitable choice over the others, which harbour no such fault?

Thanks for the discussion. Short of having extensive information about the use of the term in context (as in Makino and Tsutsui) we really have no alternative but to have a small set of succinct glosses. I'm comfortable with the current set.

I would like to provide some counterpoints.

On case alternation other than 欲しい, etc.
The translative を does not qualify, it is used specifically with intransitive motion verbs to mark a path traversed - it is semantically distinct from accusative を. Here we have a particle taking upon another function that is not present elsewhere; with 欲しい, what is being proposed is that a particle suddenly takes the function of another particle for seemingly no reason. 
Translative and accusative を have much better parallels in locative and dative に.
What happens with the (ら)れる・できる potential forms is much more similar, but it can still be inferred from their historical usage and etymology that they were originally structured with が over that which is possible to be acted upon, and the actor with に - they do not originally take objects and I think it a mistake to call the が格 an object.

On transitivity, semantics and syntax.
"Fish is wanted" and "I want fish" are semantically equivalent. You seem to be conflating semantic/thematic roles and syntactic roles, they are related but not the same; across those two sentences the thematic roles remain the same, it is only the syntactic roles that change in regards to who is the subject.
That 欲しい feels transitive, I suspect comes from it having two thematic roles that you would expect of a transitive verb: stimulus and experiencer.
In the two sentences above, the fish is the stimulus and I/me is the experiencer; in European languages, we commonly have the experiencer as the subject and the stimulus as the object of a transitive verb, that is the case of the english 'want' - but Japanese does not do this, it has the stimulus as the nominative resulting in an intransitive word while the experiencer is either omitted, topicalised, or marked by the dative.

As for the case alternation in 欲しい、嫌い and 好き.
I advocate for disregarding this entirely. Though you can occasionally find someone who uses を欲しい most do not. Acceptability tests also consistently rank the use of accusatives with those adjectives lower than the standard nominative; and if you go asking about you will find someone who opposes those structures after not too long - particularly so for を欲しい - but I do not think you could find someone who considers the usual が as ungrammatical.
Those uses are an anomaly and should be held to be an anomaly, the grammar of adjectives does not license their existence.

Lastly, が as a grammatical object.
It is unfalsifiable. Japanese lacks things such as number and gender agreement on predicates, which deprives us of any features we could use to determine what is and is not the subject. The only recourse we have is the が格.
So, you could say that in that one case it does indeed represent the object - but you cannot prove it and neither can I disprove you.
However, if we say that it becomes the object, then that becomes a peculiar exception to the grammar: we have essentially created a new rule. Similarly, we would need another one that says that に marks the subject whenever it is used every blue moon or so.
I argue, that since neither can be proven nor disproven, we take it to always be the subject and choose the gloss accordingly as that reduces the number of rules and exceptions we have to work with, making the process more consistent and eliminating potential confusion by the reader: if all else is equal, the simpler alternative should be better.

Hasegawa, Y. (2014). Japanese: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge University Press.

Schaanning, J. G. (2019). Case-alternation with Japanese adjectives: A cognitive transitive perspective (Master's thesis).

To throw in my two cents:

From a syntax perspective, in most situations in Japanese, the case marker corresponds to the grammatical function (e.g., nominative が marks the subject, accusative を marks the direct object). But I agree with the view that 欲しい (along with 好き and others) is an exception where the nominative case marker が actually indicates the direct object (Hasegawa 2014). 

For what it's worth, other examples of such "case alternation" occur with potential verbs, where the direct object can be marked with either が or を, and with motion verbs, where the location of motion--not the direct object--is marked with を.

From a cognitive perspective, I would argue that 欲しい *feels* transitive, so I agree with Marcus's 2021 comment that it should have an active gloss. This mainly a feeling from personal experience, as I don't feel that the glosses "wanted"/"want-able"/"desirable" accurately convey the semantics of 欲しい compared to the more transitive "want". 

If I say 肉がほしい, I mean "I want fish", and not "Fish is wanted" (which is semantically incorrect, as the want-er is definitely the speaker). In my interpretation, this is a sentence whose subject is not directly referenced and whose predicate ほしい acts on a direct object 肉 with the case marker が. One could argue for the interpretation "Fish is wanted (by me)", but this feels stilted to me.

There are also plenty of examples in both literature and spontaneous speech where native speakers replace が with the "nonstandard" を when using 欲しい, which may suggest a similar stance that 欲しい is an transitive predicate. For instance, Murakami in his novel, The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle (1994): 「十分だけでいいから時間を欲しいの。」(see Schaanning 2019 for more examples).

So I'm in favor of "want" or "wanting" rather than "wanted" for the glosses. I see the potential value in using "wanted" as a gloss since it's easier to explain to a learner why 欲しい takes the case marker が and makes POS alignment between Japanese and English easier, but I think it's less faithful to how 欲しい is used and perceived. 

All told, there is no definitive solution to this: Hasegawa admits, "At one time, I [...] equated nominative [が] with subject, but I am now convinced that accepting a nominative-marked direct object is more appropriate [...] The reader can likewise select either stance because both are equally persuasive and equally problematic."

Non, you have recently submitted some very good and thoughtful suggestions to several entries, and I hope that you will continue to contribute to jmdict. If our editors do not wish to spend more time considering this entry, then that's the end of the discussion. Please bear in mind that we're all volunteers, that engaging in arguments can be very taxing on the time and energy of others, and that the happiness of our long-time contributors is more important than any particular entry.

Once more, apologies, I am fully aware that this must be a nuisance but I cannot agree with the decision to close this as none of the points I made were rebuked nor the question I raised answered.
As it stands, the decision to reject 2308129 seems to be one without any objective backing as the translation criteria I have brought up now and previously against the current glosses is the same one that the very editor who closed it has just used as support for minor alterations to the proposed での entry.

So, I again ask: translate any sentence with 'want', then do the same with 'wanting'; disregard 'wanted' altogether if you wish to.
食べ物が欲しい = I want food
食べ物が欲しい = I (am) wanting food?
I think that which is the most natural translation is evident. But if so, what is it that makes the latter a better choice over the former?

Thanks for the discussion. Short of having extensive information about the use of the term in context (as in Makino and Tsutsui) we really have no alternative but to have a small set of succinct glosses. I'm comfortable with the current set.

I would like to provide some counterpoints.

On case alternation other than 欲しい, etc.
The translative を does not qualify, it is used specifically with intransitive motion verbs to mark a path traversed - it is semantically distinct from accusative を. Here we have a particle taking upon another function that is not present elsewhere; with 欲しい, what is being proposed is that a particle suddenly takes the function of another particle for seemingly no reason. 
Translative and accusative を have much better parallels in locative and dative に.
What happens with the (ら)れる・できる potential forms is much more similar, but it can still be inferred from their historical usage and etymology that they were originally structured with が over that which is possible to be acted upon, and the actor with に - they do not originally take objects and I think it a mistake to call the が格 an object.

On transitivity, semantics and syntax.
"Fish is wanted" and "I want fish" are semantically equivalent. You seem to be conflating semantic/thematic roles and syntactic roles, they are related but not the same; across those two sentences the thematic roles remain the same, it is only the syntactic roles that change in regards to who is the subject.
That 欲しい feels transitive, I suspect comes from it having two thematic roles that you would expect of a transitive verb: stimulus and experiencer.
In the two sentences above, the fish is the stimulus and I/me is the experiencer; in European languages, we commonly have the experiencer as the subject and the stimulus as the object of a transitive verb, that is the case of the english 'want' - but Japanese does not do this, it has the stimulus as the nominative resulting in an intransitive word while the experiencer is either omitted, topicalised, or marked by the dative.

As for the case alternation in 欲しい、嫌い and 好き.
I advocate for disregarding this entirely. Though you can occasionally find someone who uses を欲しい most do not. Acceptability tests also consistently rank the use of accusatives with those adjectives lower than the standard nominative; and if you go asking about you will find someone who opposes those structures after not too long - particularly so for を欲しい - but I do not think you could find someone who considers the usual が as ungrammatical.
Those uses are an anomaly and should be held to be an anomaly, the grammar of adjectives does not license their existence.

Lastly, が as a grammatical object.
It is unfalsifiable. Japanese lacks things such as number and gender agreement on predicates, which deprives us of any features we could use to determine what is and is not the subject. The only recourse we have is the が格.
So, you could say that in that one case it does indeed represent the object - but you cannot prove it and neither can I disprove you.
However, if we say that it becomes the object, then that becomes a peculiar exception to the grammar: we have essentially created a new rule. Similarly, we would need another one that says that に marks the subject whenever it is used every blue moon or so.
I argue, that since neither can be proven nor disproven, we take it to always be the subject and choose the gloss accordingly as that reduces the number of rules and exceptions we have to work with, making the process more consistent and eliminating potential confusion by the reader: if all else is equal, the simpler alternative should be better.

Hasegawa, Y. (2014). Japanese: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge University Press.

Schaanning, J. G. (2019). Case-alternation with Japanese adjectives: A cognitive transitive perspective (Master's thesis).

To throw in my two cents:

From a syntax perspective, in most situations in Japanese, the case marker corresponds to the grammatical function (e.g., nominative が marks the subject, accusative を marks the direct object). But I agree with the view that 欲しい (along with 好き and others) is an exception where the nominative case marker が actually indicates the direct object (Hasegawa 2014). 

For what it's worth, other examples of such "case alternation" occur with potential verbs, where the direct object can be marked with either が or を, and with motion verbs, where the location of motion--not the direct object--is marked with を.

From a cognitive perspective, I would argue that 欲しい *feels* transitive, so I agree with Marcus's 2021 comment that it should have an active gloss. This mainly a feeling from personal experience, as I don't feel that the glosses "wanted"/"want-able"/"desirable" accurately convey the semantics of 欲しい compared to the more transitive "want". 

If I say 肉がほしい, I mean "I want fish", and not "Fish is wanted" (which is semantically incorrect, as the want-er is definitely the speaker). In my interpretation, this is a sentence whose subject is not directly referenced and whose predicate ほしい acts on a direct object 肉 with the case marker が. One could argue for the interpretation "Fish is wanted (by me)", but this feels stilted to me.

There are also plenty of examples in both literature and spontaneous speech where native speakers replace が with the "nonstandard" を when using 欲しい, which may suggest a similar stance that 欲しい is an transitive predicate. For instance, Murakami in his novel, The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle (1994): 「十分だけでいいから時間を欲しいの。」(see Schaanning 2019 for more examples).

So I'm in favor of "want" or "wanting" rather than "wanted" for the glosses. I see the potential value in using "wanted" as a gloss since it's easier to explain to a learner why 欲しい takes the case marker が and makes POS alignment between Japanese and English easier, but I think it's less faithful to how 欲しい is used and perceived. 

All told, there is no definitive solution to this: Hasegawa admits, "At one time, I [...] equated nominative [が] with subject, but I am now convinced that accepting a nominative-marked direct object is more appropriate [...] The reader can likewise select either stance because both are equally persuasive and equally problematic."

Link to gairaigo syn: パスポート

@@ -18,0 +18,2 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1101510">パスポート</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1101510">パスポート</xref>

Link to syn

@@ -12,0 +12,1 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1843220">変温動物</xref>

Probably enough now. People can read the comments.

I don't think "express a desire" is ideal - I would read it as somebody explicitly saying they want something, when that's not what this 
means - and "to display want" sounds a little unnatural to me. "to indicate" also sounds very intentional and while it can be, it 
certainly doesn't have to be. It also sounds like the "wish" is being pointed out quite clearly when this is more about 

私 being the subject is rare but when it is, the context is about somebody else reacting  e.g. by noticing the speaker's feelings and 
buying something for them. e.g. google results for "私が欲しがって" (all from the first page): 
"空港で私が欲しがってたらきゃんちが買ってくれたお魚シート♪( ´θ｀)ノ"
" “私が欲しがってた バスの降車ボタン 娘が見つけて ガチャってきてくれたよ"
"友達以上恋人未満の彼から、私が欲しがってたアロマセットをプレゼントしてもらいました。"
"夫「ガレージにきて」私「うん」→私が欲しがってた新品のバイクがドーンと置いてあった！"

daijr: ほしいと思う。ほしそうなようすをする。
I think "appear to" (ようす sense 2: "look; appearance") and "seem to" work the best fit here.

@@ -20,2 +20,3 @@
-<gloss>to express a desire</gloss>
-<gloss>to display want</gloss>
+<gloss>to appear to want to have (something)</gloss>
+<gloss>to obviously want</gloss>
+<gloss>to seem to want</gloss>

ルミナス:
父は僕がいつも欲しがっていた自転車を買ってくれた My father bought me the bicycle (which) I had wanted for a long time.
その子はアイスクリームを泣いて欲しがった The child cried for ice cream.
GG5 (-がる)
(1) 〔…という感情･感覚を表す〕
(2) 〔…したいという気持ちを表す〕

I was going to comment that it seems only to be used in the third person (as in all 11 sentences), but then I saw that ルミナス example which is first person.
I think GG5's explanation is good -  the ...を表す is important, It's more about expressing and stating rather than appearing.
I'll suggest some tweaks.

@@ -20,3 +20,3 @@
-<gloss>to appear to desire</gloss>
-<gloss>to seemingly want</gloss>
-<gloss>to apparently wish for</gloss>
+<gloss>to express a desire</gloss>
+<gloss>to display want</gloss>
+<gloss>to indicate a wish for</gloss>

meikyo
が・る〘接尾〙
…という気持ちや様子を外に見せる意を表す。「悲し─・欲し─・恥ずかし─」「寒む─・痛た─・怖わ─」「新し─・珍し─」「いや─・不思議─」「眠た─・煙た─」「会いた─・知りた─・話した
─」「粋─・通─」「強─・得意─（＝ぶる）」 感情や感覚が外部に現れた様子をいう。「悲しがって（＝悲しそうにして）いる姿が哀れだ」

The point I was making is that it won't be obvious from the original glosses that this is a verb you only use to describe what others appear to want. You 
wouldn't say X私はこれほしがっているよね to say "I want this", and I think this needs to be made clear in all -がる entries.

My problem with this suggestion is that none of the 3 JEs I use has any mention of appear/seemingly, and none of the 11 Tanaka sentences does either. The closest I can see is a また at the end of Koj's explanation. The original glosses are pretty close to the ones in the references. I suspect it's used just as a verbification of 欲しい.

gg5

splitting

@@ -19,0 +20,4 @@
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>bringing up</gloss>
@@ -21 +24,0 @@
-<gloss>bringing up</gloss>

Link to verb

@@ -16,0 +16,2 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1547090">養う</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1547090">養う</xref>

gg5

@@ -16 +15,0 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1221690">気になる・1</xref>
@@ -18 +17,2 @@
-<gloss>to be worried about (something)</gloss>
+<gloss>to worry one</gloss>
+<gloss>to be concerned about</gloss>

Fixing part-of-speech tags

@@ -13,0 +14 @@
+<pos>&exp;</pos>
@@ -15,2 +15,0 @@
-<pos>&vi;</pos>
-<pos>&exp;</pos>

G n-grams:

気に掛かる	18143
気にかかる	102369

@@ -5 +5 @@
-<keb>気に掛かる</keb>
+<keb>気にかかる</keb>
@@ -8 +8 @@
-<keb>気にかかる</keb>
+<keb>気に掛かる</keb>

Daijirin has an entry for まよう【迷う・紕う】

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーー─┬───────────╮
│ 迷い　 │ 2,657,313 │
│ 紕い　 │         0 │ - rK
│ 紕　　 │       233 │ - [io] to [sK]
│ まよい │    34,566 │
╰─ーーー─┴───────────╯

@@ -10,0 +11 @@
+<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>
@@ -14 +15 @@
-<ke_inf>&io;</ke_inf>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>

gg5, prog, ウィズダム和英辞典

All the JEs have "illusion"/"delusion". Works best as a separate sense, in my view.

@@ -25,0 +26 @@
+<gloss>perplexity</gloss>
@@ -27,0 +29,5 @@
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>illusion</gloss>
+<gloss>delusion</gloss>

link to verb

@@ -23,0 +23,1 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1532710">迷う・2</xref>

Link to full

@@ -12,0 +12,1 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2201280">京の着倒れ</xref>

syn

@@ -14,0 +14,2 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1781060">温血動物</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1781060">温血動物</xref>

ant, syn

@@ -12,0 +12,3 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1556930">冷血動物</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1556930">冷血動物</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1760340">恒温動物</xref>

押し寿司	89138
押しずし	3989
押し鮨	3168
押鮨	344
押寿司	4559
おし寿司	586

Found in the wild.

@@ -7,0 +8,3 @@
+<keb>押寿司</keb>
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
@@ -11,0 +15,6 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>おし寿司</keb>
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>押鮨</keb>

箱寿司 is a less common synonym. Xref not necessary. 
I don't think 大阪鮨 is very helpful either.

@@ -18,2 +17,0 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2630520">箱寿司</xref>
-<xref type="see" seq="2201270">大阪鮨</xref>

ngram

@@ -5,1 +5,1 @@
-<keb>押し鮨</keb>
+<keb>押し寿司</keb>
@@ -8,1 +8,4 @@
-<keb>押し寿司</keb>
+<keb>押しずし</keb>
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>押し鮨</keb>

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/毛氈

If you search for 「毛氈」 on wikipedia, it takes you to 「フェルト」.

@@ -13,1 +13,1 @@
-<gloss>rug</gloss>
+<gloss>rug (esp. felt)</gloss>

in english, cold-blooded is an ambiguous term that isn't used in technical writing.  there is confusion of cold-blooded vs warm-blooded with both ectoterm vs endotherm and poikilotherm vs homeotherm

i would prefer to leave these all as the literal translations based on the kanji, in which case this entry is poikilotherm and cold-blooded = 冷血動物

@@ -16 +15,0 @@
-<gloss>cold-blooded animal</gloss>

enwiki: "However some ectotherms remain in temperature-constant environments to the point that they are actually able to maintain a 
constant internal temperature (i.e. are homeothermic). It is this distinction that often makes the term "poikilotherm" more useful than 
the vernacular "cold-blooded", which is sometimes used to refer to ectotherms more generally."

I'm OK with this or an expl: " animal whose internal temperature varies considerably"

Though maybe we should leave this open for our resident biology expert (Rene).

もっとわかりやすい

@@ -13,0 +14 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1781060">温血動物</xref>
@@ -14,0 +16 @@
+<gloss>cold-blooded animal</gloss>

Syn

@@ -13,0 +13,2 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1556930">冷血動物</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1556930">冷血動物</xref>

daijs

@@ -6,0 +6,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>食倒れ</keb>

Link to full form

@@ -12,0 +12,1 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2201290">大阪の食い倒れ</xref>

べろべろ	36765
ベロベロ	69134
べろんべろん	14699
ベロンベロン	23438

Yes, I think they should be split. I'll do it.

@@ -4,3 +3,0 @@
-<r_ele>
-<reb>べろべろ</reb>
-</r_ele>
@@ -11,4 +8 @@
-<reb>べろんべろん</reb>
-</r_ele>
-<r_ele>
-<reb>ベロンベロン</reb>
+<reb>べろべろ</reb>
@@ -17,2 +10,0 @@
-<stagr>べろべろ</stagr>
-<stagr>ベロベロ</stagr>

gg5, Wisdom

Should べろんべろん/ベロンベロン really be merged here? I think it would be better to have a separate entry.

@@ -26 +26,2 @@
-<gloss>very drunken</gloss>
+<gloss>dead drunk</gloss>
+<gloss>blind drunk</gloss>

大辞泉

@@ -26 +26 @@
-<gloss>drunken</gloss>
+<gloss>very drunken</gloss>

not needed

@@ -26 +25,0 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1372670">酔っ払う・よっぱらう</xref>

@@ -28,0 +28,2 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1372650">酔う・よう</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1372670">酔っ払う・よっぱらう</xref>

Link to rest of etyl

@@ -12,0 +12,1 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1438010">鉄砲・3</xref>

Entry created

@@ -14,0 +14,1 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1790360">押し鮨・おしずし</xref>

Link to 押し寿司 generally

@@ -12,2 +12,3 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1099220">バッテラ</xref>
-<xref type="see" seq="1099220">バッテラ</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1790360">押し寿司</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1099220">バッテラ・2</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1099220">バッテラ・2</xref>

Entry created

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<pos>&n;</pos>

Link to short form

@@ -13,0 +13,2 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1701140">着倒れ</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1701140">着倒れ</xref>

Entry created

Link to short form

@@ -14,0 +14,2 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1871730">食い倒れ</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1871730">食い倒れ</xref>

Entry created

http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/leaf/jn2/132462/m1u/体育座り/
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/体育座り

@@ -10,0 +10,3 @@
+<r_ele>
+<reb>たいいくすわり</reb>
+</r_ele>

Entry created

http://news.goo.ne.jp/article/gooeditor/life/gooeditor-20080507-04.html

Playing safe.

@@ -12,2 +12,0 @@
-<gloss>girly boy</gloss>
-<gloss>girlyman</gloss>

@@ -12,1 +12,3 @@
-<gloss>Rigel</gloss>
+<xref type="see" seq="2571980">リゲル</xref>
+<field>&astron;</field>
+<gloss>Rigel (star in the constellation Orion)</gloss>

Daijirin, Wiki

@@ -12,1 +12,4 @@
-<gloss>Rigel (the star of Genji)</gloss>
+<gloss>Rigel</gloss>
+<gloss>Beta Orionis</gloss>
+<gloss>Beta Ori</gloss>
+<gloss g_type="lit">Genji star</gloss>

daijs

@@ -13,1 +13,2 @@
-<gloss>Betelgeuse</gloss>
+<field>&astron;</field>
+<gloss>Betelgeuse (star in the constellation Orion)</gloss>

wiki, google hits

'ori' always seems to be capitalized (although 'alpha' is sometimes not)

@@ -15,1 +15,1 @@
-<gloss>Alpha ori</gloss>
+<gloss>Alpha Ori</gloss>

Daijirin, Wiki

daij 和・洋・中・エスニック 世界の料理がわかる辞典 (all list 
箱鮨)
箱寿司	112
箱ずし	59
箱鮨	6

@@ -5,0 +6,6 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>箱ずし</keb>
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>箱鮨</keb>
@@ -14,2 +20,3 @@
-<gloss>pressed sushi</gloss>
-<gloss>box sushi</gloss>
+<field>&food;</field>
+<gloss>oshizushi</gloss>
+<gloss g_type="expl">sushi rice and other ingredients pressed in box or mould (mold)</gloss>

@@ -12,0 +12,1 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1790360">押し鮨・おしずし</xref>

Init, syn of 押し寿司

I copied this meaning from "に連れて" because I think it can mean the same thing, based the Dictionary of Intermediate Japanese Grammar by Seiichi Makino pages 268 to 270.

@@ -15,0 +16 @@
+<gloss>as X, then Y (e.g. as we age we gain wisdom, as wine matures it becomes more valuable, etc.)</gloss>

i wouldn't call it a suf.  [exp] or [exp,adv], i think

@@ -14,2 +14,0 @@
-<pos>&suf;</pos>
-<xref type="see" seq="2630570">に従い・にしたがい</xref>

GG5

Kanji form gets more hits than kana-only.

@@ -4,0 +4,4 @@
+<k_ele>
+<keb>に従って</keb>
+<ke_pri>spec1</ke_pri>
+</k_ele>
@@ -6,0 +10,1 @@
+<re_pri>spec1</re_pri>
@@ -8,0 +13,1 @@
+<pos>&exp;</pos>
@@ -10,0 +16,1 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2630570">に従い・にしたがい</xref>
@@ -11,0 +18,1 @@
+<gloss>according to</gloss>

新和英中辞典, Eijiro

Looks like it was missing a final ん.
See wikipedia

@@ -8,1 +8,1 @@
-<reb>かいものいぞ</reb>
+<reb>かいものいぞん</reb>

Eijiro, ＫＯＤ追加語彙

@@ -11,0 +11,1 @@
+<pos>&exp;</pos>

Japanese Wikipedia page:
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/買い物依存症

Eijiro, ＫＯＤ追加語彙

@@ -13,0 +13,1 @@
+<gloss>CBD</gloss>

Japanese Wikipedia page:
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/買い物依存症

With the 〜症 ending is somewhat more formal and medical; on NHK currently there’s a program not using the 〜しょう ending.
I’ve distinguished these by including/not including “disorder” (for “sickness”).