@@ -17 +17,2 @@
-<gloss>tight skirt, straight skirt</gloss>
+<gloss>tight skirt</gloss>
+<gloss>straight skirt</gloss>

daiji

@@ -12,0 +13,6 @@
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="2071720">タイトスカート</xref>
+<misc>&abbr;</misc>
+<gloss>tight skirt, straight skirt</gloss>
+</sense>

@@ -26 +26 @@
-<gloss>to pass (i.e. of time)</gloss>
+<gloss>to pass (of time)</gloss>

Trimming & standardizing.

@@ -54 +54 @@
-<s_inf>often used after adjective stems or the -masu stems of verbs</s_inf>
+<s_inf>often used after adj. stems or the -masu stems of verbs</s_inf>

OK, leave it where it is.

to me it makes more sense to list derived suffix terms at the end, as in the kokugos.  but that's just a stylistic choice, so either way.

Tanaka corpus, GG5

Sense 6 seems to be the most common one, and seems to be usually in kana. Should it be moved up? We (and other dictionaries) tend to keep senses that are suffixes or auxiliaries doen the back.

@@ -52,0 +53 @@
+<misc>&uk;</misc>

Yes, hard to express.

https://kufura.jp/work/business-manner/136870

Not necessarily the person you're talking to. Not sure how best to convey this in the glosses.

@@ -43 +43 @@
-<gloss>thanks to your kindness</gloss>
+<gloss>thanks to your (his, their, everyone's, etc.) kindness</gloss>
@@ -45,0 +46 @@
+<gloss>thanks to your efforts</gloss>

daijr: （１）「おかげ」を丁寧に言う語。「―でよくわかりました」
       （２）漠然とした感謝の気持ちを表す語。ありがたいことに。多く挨拶の語として用いる。「―で無事に帰って参りました」「『御両親は御健在ですか』『はい，―で』」

I don't think "(I'm fine) thank you" is a great gloss. Although it is the usual translation for "おかげさまで元気です", it doesn't mean "thank you for asking". See sense 2 of daijr's definition.
I think we should split this into two senses.

@@ -33,2 +33 @@
-<gloss>(I'm fine) thank you</gloss>
-<gloss>thanks to you</gloss>
+<gloss>thankfully</gloss>
@@ -35,0 +35,2 @@
+<gloss>luckily</gloss>
+<gloss>by God's grace</gloss>
@@ -36,0 +38,8 @@
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&exp;</pos>
+<misc>&pol;</misc>
+<misc>&uk;</misc>
+<gloss>thanks to your kindness</gloss>
+<gloss>thanks to your assistance</gloss>
+<gloss>thanks to your support</gloss>

切取線	2140

@@ -8,0 +9,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>切取線</keb>
@@ -18,0 +22 @@
+<re_restr>切取線</re_restr>
@@ -28 +32 @@
-<gloss>line to cut something off along</gloss>
+<gloss>line along which to cut something off</gloss>

May as well have the other two. The hiragana version needed restrictions.

@@ -9,0 +10,6 @@
+<k_ele>
+<keb>切取り線</keb>
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>きりとり線</keb>
+</k_ele>
@@ -11,0 +18,3 @@
+<re_restr>切り取り線</re_restr>
+<re_restr>切取り線</re_restr>
+<re_restr>きりとり線</re_restr>

prog

G n-grams:

切り取り線	11377
切取り線	494
斬り取り線	No matches
斬取り線	No matches
きりとり線	408
キリトリ線	2539

@@ -6,0 +7,3 @@
+<k_ele>
+<keb>キリトリ線</keb>
+</k_ele>
@@ -8,0 +12,4 @@
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>キリトリせん</reb>
+<re_restr>キリトリ線</re_restr>
@@ -12,0 +20,2 @@
+<gloss>perforated line</gloss>
+<gloss>dotted line</gloss>

Dropping that gloss for now.

@@ -22 +21,0 @@
-<gloss>entire collection</gloss>

Quiet.

gg5, prog, daijr

Do you have any examples of it being used with that meaning? There's nothing in the refs.

@@ -19,0 +20,2 @@
+<gloss>complete collection</gloss>
+<gloss>complete series</gloss>
@@ -21 +22,0 @@
-<gloss>complete collection</gloss>

The current definition has a very limited 
scope such as the Compltet Works if 
William Shakespeare.  全集 is more 
encompassing as in "this is my entire 
collection of books" which is outside of 
the limited scope of "complete works."

@@ -19,0 +20,2 @@
+<gloss>entire collection</gloss>
+<gloss>complete collection</gloss>

@@ -18,1 +18,1 @@
-<pos>&suf;</pos>
+<pos>&n-suf;</pos>

since we landed at calling 胴丸 "torso armor".

@@ -23 +23 @@
-<gloss>armour that opens at the back</gloss>
+<gloss>torso armour that opens at the back</gloss>

I'll close it now. No need to tell readers not to confuse two senses.

@@ -24 +24 @@
-<gloss>haramaki (not to be confused with the stomach covering)</gloss>
+<gloss>haramaki</gloss>

Apparently it needs to be short. Longer and more descriptive than "type of armour" …but only just.

@@ -23 +23 @@
-<gloss>armour that was initially used on foot, but later also from horseback. Opens at the back</gloss>
+<gloss>armour that opens at the back</gloss>

Embarrassing oversight.

@@ -23 +23 @@
-<gloss>armour that was Initially used on foot, but later also from horseback. Opens at the back</gloss>
+<gloss>armour that was initially used on foot, but later also from horseback. Opens at the back</gloss>

@@ -23 +23 @@
-<gloss>armor put on from the front and fastened in the back. Initially made for those on foot, but later came to (along with the dō-maru) replace the heavier and less mobile ō-yoroi on horseback as well</gloss>
+<gloss>armour that was Initially used on foot, but later also from horseback. Opens at the back</gloss>

gg5, daij

Creating a separate adverb sense.

@@ -19 +18,0 @@
-<pos>&adv;</pos>
@@ -24,2 +23,6 @@
-<gloss>reason</gloss>
-<gloss>destiny</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&adv;</pos>
+<gloss>originally</gloss>
+<gloss>from the start</gloss>
+<gloss>by nature</gloss>

gg5 daijs

the refs list [adv] last

@@ -17 +16,0 @@
-<pos>&adv;</pos>
@@ -19,0 +19 @@
+<pos>&adv;</pos>

chujiten

@@ -18 +18 @@
-<gloss>the seat next to</gloss>
+<gloss>adjacent seat</gloss>

https://biz.trans-suite.jp/23768
https://career-picks.com/business-yougo/eduku/
http://static.kansaibenkyou.net/node/109
嘔吐く	192
噦く	No matches
嘔く	42
えずく	3109
えづく	2945

This isn't in any of the JEs or meikyo/shinmeikai (and the kokugo examples are very old) but it's still used in Kansai.
I suggest handling this in the same way we did for 偏固.
I think ik is correct for えづく. It's still quite common. The first link notes: "「えずく」を「えづく」と表記しているのを見かけることがありますが、正しくは「えずく」と書きます".

@@ -9,0 +10,3 @@
+<k_ele>
+<keb>嘔く</keb>
+</k_ele>
@@ -15 +18 @@
-<re_inf>&ok;</re_inf>
+<re_inf>&ik;</re_inf>
@@ -19,0 +23,3 @@
+<misc>&uk;</misc>
+<s_inf>archaic in standard Japanese</s_inf>
+<dial>&ksb;</dial>

Daijr has ヱヅク as an old reading.

Could possibly be dropped,

@@ -15 +15 @@
-<re_inf>&ik;</re_inf>
+<re_inf>&ok;</re_inf>

@@ -14,0 +15 @@
+<re_inf>&ik;</re_inf>

虱潰し	5490
しらみ潰し	1807
蝨潰し	< 20

google hits

@@ -5,0 +6,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>しらみ潰し</keb>

removing lit from non-exp

@@ -16,1 +16,1 @@
-<gloss>very thorough search (for contraband, escaped convict, etc.) (lit: crushing lice)</gloss>
+<gloss>very thorough search (for contraband, escaped convict, etc.)</gloss>

Not convinced about a merge with 匆々. No evidence it's used with senses 2 and 3, and may need a lot of restrictions.

gg5, meikyo, daij

I think 草々 and 匆々 should be merged, as in meikyo and shinmeikai. GG5 has a single 匆々 entry with a "'草々'とも" note on the "yours in haste" sense.

@@ -13,0 +14 @@
+<pos>&n;</pos>
@@ -15,4 +15,0 @@
-<pos>&int;</pos>
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<gloss>brevity</gloss>
-<gloss>rudeness</gloss>
@@ -19,0 +17,2 @@
+<gloss>rush</gloss>
+<gloss>flurry</gloss>
@@ -23 +21,0 @@
-<pos>&int;</pos>
@@ -24,0 +23,14 @@
+<gloss>simple</gloss>
+<gloss>brief</gloss>
+<gloss>quick</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&adj-na;</pos>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>rough</gloss>
+<gloss>crude</gloss>
+<gloss>careless</gloss>
+<gloss>inadequate</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&exp;</pos>
@@ -27,2 +39,2 @@
-<gloss>Yours Sincerely</gloss>
-<gloss>Yours in haste</gloss>
+<gloss>yours sincerely</gloss>
+<gloss>yours in haste</gloss>

中辞典: 草々 Sincerely (yours); Yours truly.
ルミナス: Yours truly 
GG5 (匆々 entry): 【‘草々'とも】 〔手紙の結び〕 Yours in haste.

I don't think it has to be a literal translation. Worth making it align with 匆々.

@@ -27 +27,2 @@
-<gloss>In haste</gloss>
+<gloss>Yours Sincerely</gloss>
+<gloss>Yours in haste</gloss>

Learn Japanese New College Text Volume II ©1984 John Young and Kimiko Nakajima-Okano, Chapter 14, Note 14.4.1, page 286.

Nothing about this conveys an idea of sincerely, although I get the allusion to an example English ending.  The meaning however is “in haste”.

I tried to add [see=1394180 ・前略[1]] but I get crazy output.

@@ -27 +27 @@
-<gloss>Yours Sincerely</gloss>
+<gloss>In haste</gloss>

daij, meikyo

@@ -25,2 +25,2 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2435210">匆々</xref>
-<s_inf>letters ending with this start with 前略</s_inf>
+<xref type="see" seq="2435210">匆々・2</xref>
+<s_inf>letters ending with this start with 前略, 冠省, etc.</s_inf>

OK.

I agree with Marcus. I don't see a need for it, and obsc isn't appropriate here.

Why keep it? It's a simple adj+noun 
collocation that appears in a single gg5 
example.  I don't think obsc is quite right 
either. It's just a perfectly logical 
collocation that isn't particularly common or 
noteworthy.

I'd keep it with a tag.

@@ -12,0 +13 @@
+<misc>&obsc;</misc>

淡い悲しみ	229
淡い痛み	124
淡い心	1069
淡い期待	121322

澪標	9435
澪つくし	6589

Could mention it's Chapter 14 of the 源氏物語 too.

@@ -5,0 +6,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>澪つくし</keb>
@@ -11,0 +15 @@
+<re_restr>澪標</re_restr>
@@ -14,0 +19 @@
+<re_restr>澪標</re_restr>
@@ -17,0 +23 @@
+<re_restr>澪標</re_restr>
@@ -23,0 +30 @@
+<gloss>channel buoys</gloss>

daijs nikk

could have a note, [note="oft. used as a kakekotoba for 身を尽くし]

@@ -10,0 +11,3 @@
+<reb>みおじるし</reb>
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
@@ -11,0 +15,4 @@
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>みおづくし</reb>
+<re_inf>&ok;</re_inf>
@@ -14,0 +22 @@
+<misc>&poet;</misc>

Entry created

@@ -18,2 +18,2 @@
-<gloss>awning (over window, doorway)</gloss>
-<gloss>eaves (of roof)</gloss>
+<gloss>awning (over a window, doorway, etc.)</gloss>
+<gloss>eaves (of a roof)</gloss>

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーーーーーー─┬───────┬───────╮
│ 庇の下　　　　 │ 2,710 │ 53.9% │
│ 廂の下　　　　 │    86 │  1.7% │
│ ひさしの下　　 │ 2,235 │ 44.4% │
├─ーーーーーーー─┼───────┼───────┤
│ 庇を貸して　　 │ 1,626 │ 68.8% │
│ 廂を貸して　　 │    72 │  3.0% │
│ ひさしを貸して │   666 │ 28.2% │
╰─ーーーーーーー─┴───────┴───────╯

@@ -8,0 +9 @@
+<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>

GG5 (庇) has 2 senses covering both eaves and awnings over doors, windows, etc. 
Daijr/s have 庇/廂, but give 軒/のき as a meaning.

I think it's best the put more emphasis on the awning meaning, but not drop eaves totally.

@@ -14,0 +15 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1260330">軒・のき・1</xref>
@@ -15,0 +17 @@
+<gloss>awning (over window, doorway)</gloss>

I was looking up the difference between 軒 and 庇 and it seems that the translation "eaves (of roof)" seems to be incorrect.
軒 is the part of the roof that overhangs the wall (=eaves)
庇 is attached to a wall and overhangs windows and doors, kind of like awning/sunshade except solid


this page has a good diagram https://www.pal-ds.net/住宅まめ知識ー軒と庇/

@@ -15,0 +16 @@
+<misc>&col;</misc>

@@ -14,0 +15 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2640260">モテる</xref>

Entry created

@@ -12,0 +13 @@
+<misc>&col;</misc>

It probably is. I'll do it.

Good idea to have x-refs for all our モテ- entries (モテ期 / モテ男 / モテ度 / モテ髪 / モテファッション) to explain 
that part?

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2640260">モテる</xref>

Entry created

@@ -12,0 +13 @@
+<misc>&col;</misc>

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2640260">モテる</xref>

Entry created

@@ -25,2 +25,2 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神</xref>
-<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神・1</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神・1</xref>

Entry created

Fixing x-ref

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2176820">青竜・1</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176820">青竜・2</xref>

I meant to comment that I think the Wikipedia article missed the point about Taoist gods.

GG5: 〔道教の四方の神; 青竜, 白虎, 朱雀, 玄武〕 the four Taoist gods supposed to reign over the four points of the compass(: the blue dragon of the east, the white tiger of the west, the red phoenix of the south, and the black turtle-snake of the north).

Really one sense.

@@ -12,5 +12,6 @@
-<gloss>four gods said to rule over the four directions</gloss>
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<gloss>(in China) four gods said to rule over the four seasons</gloss>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176820">青竜・1</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176860">白虎・1</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176850">朱雀・1</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176870">玄武・1</xref>
+<gloss>four Taoist gods said to reign over the four directions</gloss>
+<gloss>four gods said to reign over the four seasons</gloss>

Wikipedia calls these "four beasts"

Entry created

@@ -16,2 +16,2 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神</xref>
-<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神・1</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神・1</xref>

Entry created

@@ -18,2 +18,2 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神</xref>
-<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神・1</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神・1</xref>

@@ -24,0 +24,1 @@
+<field>&astron;</field>

Entry created

@@ -16 +16 @@
-<gloss>White Tiger (god said to rule over the western heavens)</gloss>
+<gloss>White Tiger (Taoist god said to rule over the western heavens)</gloss>

@@ -15,2 +15,2 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神</xref>
-<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神・1</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神・1</xref>

@@ -21,0 +21,1 @@
+<field>&astron;</field>

Entry created

@@ -15,2 +15,2 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神</xref>
-<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神・1</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2176830">四神・1</xref>

@@ -21,0 +21,1 @@
+<field>&astron;</field>

Entry created

真隣	  4608	
真となり	  1446    
真隣り	  593
真隣に	  1607
真となりに  54
真隣りに	  223

@@ -6,0 +7,6 @@
+<k_ele>
+<keb>真隣り</keb>
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>真となり</keb>
+</k_ele>
@@ -10,0 +17 @@
+<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
@@ -12 +18,0 @@
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos>

Entry created

daijr/s, shinmeikai.

Sense 1 isn't arch.

@@ -21 +20,0 @@
-<pos>&adj-t;</pos>
@@ -24 +22,0 @@
-<misc>&arch;</misc>
@@ -30,2 +28 @@
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<pos>&adj-na;</pos>
+<pos>&exp;</pos>
@@ -34,2 +31,10 @@
-<gloss>Yours Sincerely</gloss>
-<gloss>Yours in haste</gloss>
+<gloss>yours sincerely</gloss>
+<gloss>yours in haste</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&adj-na;</pos>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<misc>&arch;</misc>
+<gloss>simple</gloss>
+<gloss>brief</gloss>
+<gloss>quick</gloss>

@@ -32 +32 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1596410">草々・2</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1596410">草々・4</xref>

meikyo, daij

@@ -32,2 +32,2 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1596410">草々</xref>
-<s_inf>letters ending with this start with 前略</s_inf>
+<xref type="see" seq="1596410">草々・2</xref>
+<s_inf>letters ending with this start with 前略, 冠省, etc.</s_inf>

Entry created

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
@@ -14,0 +16 @@
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>

Can't think of a more useful POS.

お決まりでしょうか？
is お決まり(になった)でしょうか (e.g. standard 
keigo)
but it's such a common use of this word (at 
restaurants etc.) that we should probably 
include something for it here, considering our 
audience?
Adj-no? exp? n?

@@ -31,0 +32,5 @@
+<sense>
+<pos>&exp;</pos>
+<misc>&pol;</misc>
+<gloss>decided</gloss>
+</sense>

fixing x-ref

@@ -22,3 +22,1 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1609660">決まり</xref>
-<xref type="see" seq="1609660">決まり・1</xref>
-<xref type="see" seq="1609660">決まり・2</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1609660">決まり・3</xref>

Entry created

I was satisfied with Marcus's version, so I'm putting it back.
I've left the commentary here rather than reject the proposed edit (which would relegate it into a separate thread), but I may not do that with future edits.
Re the "don't break up URLs into multiple lines", I'm afraid that's an artifact of browsers on some mobile devices, which insert line-break characters at the ends of text boxes.

@@ -16 +16 @@
-<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>
+<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>

already cited refs.
the previous comments.

>The back-and-forth here reminds me of the quote "perfection is the enemy of good".

How so? All you've done, is to insist that the good is unacceptable, because you insist on the bad.
For no discernable reason, and without particularly bothering to give any.
Certainly not clarity or brevity, and absolutely not accuracy.

If you wish to claim that I am letting the perfect, be the enemy of the good, you must first explain how/why what you propose is good, and not bad, and how/why what I propose is inferior.
Explain not just how maybe an entry has to be less than perfect in one aspect, for the sake of some other aspect (for example: a bit less explanation, or maybe even accuracy, for the sake of brevity …though I should note that JMdict has a policy of brevity, beyond the level of most other dictionaries), but also how that is relevant to what I propose, in contrast to what you propose.
I.e.
Don't just make claims about my positions.
That is no more than baseless nonsense.
Make a case against them! And/or for your own position!
"Put up, or shut up", as the saying goes.
(this is a general problem, that you people have. You seem to like to just say "no you're wrong. X is how it should be", and insist that everyone just blindly obey. Finding actual discussion and argumentation, to be rude and impudent disruption, rather than the cornerstone of any/all collaboration/cooperation, and the foundation of how one can reach the truth or the best decisions/conclusions …as essentially all other dictionaries and all academic/scientific/scholarly endeavours do)

As for the references you have chosen, this time…
First of all, don't break up URLs into multiple lines.
The first source, in showing a doumaru, shows a full suit of armour.
The second source is a kokugo
…and I have thoroughly explained why they are not only clearly inferior sources, but that they are also undeniably wrong and full of errors, in their entry on doumaru.
Hence, citing them is utterly invalid.
As for the third, I do not understand it's inclusion, as it is much briefer than any of the previously cited ones (aside from kokugos) and apparently just some random website mostly just concerned with costumes, and therefore not that bothered with armour.

Looking at the comments, I am pleased to see you finally deciding to actually make some kind of argument, to back up your positions (though certainly not in regards to "perfection is the enemy of good").

The one on "infantry" is quite decent.
I firmly disagree that it doesn't imply low-status footsoldiers, but then you did also, accurately, point out that it was mainly the low class footsoldiers who wore them initially, making that point rather moot.
I still see no reason to insist on "infantry", over "combat on foot".
The latter is not particularly longer, nor is it any less clear.
That said, given your arguments, there is also not much reason to insist on "combat on foot", over "infantry", so…

The second bit, however…
>"but if the kokugos don't make a point of mentioning it, I believe it's not a very important point"

How is that supposed to be an argument?

First of all, that is essentially assuming that the kokugos are infallible, or must be very sensible, on the subject.
This is disproven, not only in how they (as can be shown in all other dictionaries [but probably a lot more in Japanese dictionaries, than in English ones. Certainly a LOT more in jp-en/en-jp ones]) have many examples of errors and obvious examples of a lacking understanding of what they are describing,
but also in that the _kokugos entries on doumaru, specifically,_  clearly contain obvious, and undeniable, errors.
An argument that is clearly and obviously based on a foundation, that has already been thoroughly and undeniably shown to be invalid, cannot be regarded as a serious/honest attempt at an argument.

Secondly, you are not making any kind of argument or explanation/clarification of why it wouldn't be an important point (or why it being an important or unimportant point, should matter in the least), but simply making an Argument from (flimsy) Authority, by saying that "they probably have a reason" without bothering to show, come up with, or even think about, the reason.

You have four options, when it comes to the torso vs full suit issue:
1. Have the entry merely call it an "armour". (what I went with, and prefer, given how brief the entries are)
2. Have a sense with "torso armour", and a separate one with the no less (far more?) common "full suit" sense.
3. Actually bother to make a case, a serious and honest attempt (valid or not …though it must be a genuine attempt at validity) at a case, for why you can call it a torso armour, without the additional full suit sense.
4. Throw any sense of collaboration, logic, civility, or rational discussion out the window, and simply use your authority to ignore and dismiss all dissent (without listening to or addressing any arguments, however sound) and power through your position, without bothering with any kind of justification.

I wouldn't recommend option #4
…though it does seem to be popular here and, by all accounts, quite accepted.

@@ -16 +16 @@
-<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>
+<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>

https://www.hyogo-c.ed.jp/~rekihaku-
bo/historystation/rekihaku-meet/seminar/bugu-
kacchuu/kc_intro2.html
...中・下級の徒歩（かち）武者の甲冑として発達したもので
す。
there's also this: なお、今日胴丸と呼んでいる甲冑
は、中世には腹巻と呼ばれており、逆に今日の腹巻を中世には
胴丸と呼んでいました。(but let's just not get into 
it)
(daijr: 中世以前はこの形式の鎧を腹巻と呼んでいた。)
https://costume.iz2.or.jp/costume/535.html
胴丸は大鎧に次ぐ一般戦士の使用する軽快な武装であった。

The back-and-forth here reminds me of the 
quote "perfection is the enemy of good".

"used" seems better than "made/designed".
I'm not seeing how "combat on foot" is an 
improvement over Robin's "infantry combat" - 
neither implies low-status footsoldiers, but 
even if they did, those seem to have been the 
original wearers anyway (see sources, plus 
kokugos) so I'm not seeing the issue here.

It might be the case that 胴丸 is used to refer 
to a full suit of armor including the sense 1 
torso armor, but if the kokugos don't make a 
point of mentioning it, I believe it's not a 
very important point and that we don't have to 
either.

@@ -16,7 +16 @@
-<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for combat on foot</gloss>
-<gloss>dō-maru</gloss>
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<misc>&hist;</misc>
-<gloss>suit of armour, using such a torso armour</gloss>
+<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>

"I don't think" isn't and argument or clarification.
You say it isn't an improvement, but don't explain how or why it isn't.
Also, "infantry" is pretty much the same as "foot soldier", including the same problems.

As for "torso armour"… Yes, certainly, it is clearer, though I'd argue that if the term "armour" is used, without mention of what part your talking about, people will tend to assume that it is either torso armour, or a full suit of armour, which would be fine, here.
But okay.
"Torso armour" it is
…but then it needs to explicitly state the second sense.
(this makes this entry, inconsistent with the other armour entries, BTW)

@@ -16 +16,7 @@
-<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally designed for infantry combat</gloss>
+<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for combat on foot</gloss>
+<gloss>dō-maru</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<misc>&hist;</misc>
+<gloss>suit of armour, using such a torso armour</gloss>

I don't think those changes improve the gloss.
I'm not yielding on the "torso" point. Dropping it makes the gloss less precise and harder to visualise.

@@ -16 +16 @@
-<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally made for use on foot</gloss>
+<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally designed for infantry combat</gloss>

I was quite satisfied with the position stated by Robin and Marcus. Please don't keep submitting this edit.

>I was satisfied with Marcus's version

…despite the arguments and evidence against it, and the utter lack of arguments or evidence for it.
What is the basis, for favouring his version?
Neither you, nor Marcus, have presented any.
As such, there is no basis for going with it
…or are you saying that you are choosing to go with alternative 4, in the list of options I listed?

@@ -16 +16 @@
-<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>
+<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>

I was satisfied with Marcus's version, so I'm putting it back.
I've left the commentary here rather than reject the proposed edit (which would relegate it into a separate thread), but I may not do that with future edits.
Re the "don't break up URLs into multiple lines", I'm afraid that's an artifact of browsers on some mobile devices, which insert line-break characters at the ends of text boxes.

@@ -16 +16 @@
-<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>
+<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>

already cited refs.
the previous comments.

>The back-and-forth here reminds me of the quote "perfection is the enemy of good".

How so? All you've done, is to insist that the good is unacceptable, because you insist on the bad.
For no discernable reason, and without particularly bothering to give any.
Certainly not clarity or brevity, and absolutely not accuracy.

If you wish to claim that I am letting the perfect, be the enemy of the good, you must first explain how/why what you propose is good, and not bad, and how/why what I propose is inferior.
Explain not just how maybe an entry has to be less than perfect in one aspect, for the sake of some other aspect (for example: a bit less explanation, or maybe even accuracy, for the sake of brevity …though I should note that JMdict has a policy of brevity, beyond the level of most other dictionaries), but also how that is relevant to what I propose, in contrast to what you propose.
I.e.
Don't just make claims about my positions.
That is no more than baseless nonsense.
Make a case against them! And/or for your own position!
"Put up, or shut up", as the saying goes.
(this is a general problem, that you people have. You seem to like to just say "no you're wrong. X is how it should be", and insist that everyone just blindly obey. Finding actual discussion and argumentation, to be rude and impudent disruption, rather than the cornerstone of any/all collaboration/cooperation, and the foundation of how one can reach the truth or the best decisions/conclusions …as essentially all other dictionaries and all academic/scientific/scholarly endeavours do)

As for the references you have chosen, this time…
First of all, don't break up URLs into multiple lines.
The first source, in showing a doumaru, shows a full suit of armour.
The second source is a kokugo
…and I have thoroughly explained why they are not only clearly inferior sources, but that they are also undeniably wrong and full of errors, in their entry on doumaru.
Hence, citing them is utterly invalid.
As for the third, I do not understand it's inclusion, as it is much briefer than any of the previously cited ones (aside from kokugos) and apparently just some random website mostly just concerned with costumes, and therefore not that bothered with armour.

Looking at the comments, I am pleased to see you finally deciding to actually make some kind of argument, to back up your positions (though certainly not in regards to "perfection is the enemy of good").

The one on "infantry" is quite decent.
I firmly disagree that it doesn't imply low-status footsoldiers, but then you did also, accurately, point out that it was mainly the low class footsoldiers who wore them initially, making that point rather moot.
I still see no reason to insist on "infantry", over "combat on foot".
The latter is not particularly longer, nor is it any less clear.
That said, given your arguments, there is also not much reason to insist on "combat on foot", over "infantry", so…

The second bit, however…
>"but if the kokugos don't make a point of mentioning it, I believe it's not a very important point"

How is that supposed to be an argument?

First of all, that is essentially assuming that the kokugos are infallible, or must be very sensible, on the subject.
This is disproven, not only in how they (as can be shown in all other dictionaries [but probably a lot more in Japanese dictionaries, than in English ones. Certainly a LOT more in jp-en/en-jp ones]) have many examples of errors and obvious examples of a lacking understanding of what they are describing,
but also in that the _kokugos entries on doumaru, specifically,_  clearly contain obvious, and undeniable, errors.
An argument that is clearly and obviously based on a foundation, that has already been thoroughly and undeniably shown to be invalid, cannot be regarded as a serious/honest attempt at an argument.

Secondly, you are not making any kind of argument or explanation/clarification of why it wouldn't be an important point (or why it being an important or unimportant point, should matter in the least), but simply making an Argument from (flimsy) Authority, by saying that "they probably have a reason" without bothering to show, come up with, or even think about, the reason.

You have four options, when it comes to the torso vs full suit issue:
1. Have the entry merely call it an "armour". (what I went with, and prefer, given how brief the entries are)
2. Have a sense with "torso armour", and a separate one with the no less (far more?) common "full suit" sense.
3. Actually bother to make a case, a serious and honest attempt (valid or not …though it must be a genuine attempt at validity) at a case, for why you can call it a torso armour, without the additional full suit sense.
4. Throw any sense of collaboration, logic, civility, or rational discussion out the window, and simply use your authority to ignore and dismiss all dissent (without listening to or addressing any arguments, however sound) and power through your position, without bothering with any kind of justification.

I wouldn't recommend option #4
…though it does seem to be popular here and, by all accounts, quite accepted.

@@ -16 +16 @@
-<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>
+<gloss>light armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>

https://www.hyogo-c.ed.jp/~rekihaku-
bo/historystation/rekihaku-meet/seminar/bugu-
kacchuu/kc_intro2.html
...中・下級の徒歩（かち）武者の甲冑として発達したもので
す。
there's also this: なお、今日胴丸と呼んでいる甲冑
は、中世には腹巻と呼ばれており、逆に今日の腹巻を中世には
胴丸と呼んでいました。(but let's just not get into 
it)
(daijr: 中世以前はこの形式の鎧を腹巻と呼んでいた。)
https://costume.iz2.or.jp/costume/535.html
胴丸は大鎧に次ぐ一般戦士の使用する軽快な武装であった。

The back-and-forth here reminds me of the 
quote "perfection is the enemy of good".

"used" seems better than "made/designed".
I'm not seeing how "combat on foot" is an 
improvement over Robin's "infantry combat" - 
neither implies low-status footsoldiers, but 
even if they did, those seem to have been the 
original wearers anyway (see sources, plus 
kokugos) so I'm not seeing the issue here.

It might be the case that 胴丸 is used to refer 
to a full suit of armor including the sense 1 
torso armor, but if the kokugos don't make a 
point of mentioning it, I believe it's not a 
very important point and that we don't have to 
either.

@@ -16,7 +16 @@
-<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for combat on foot</gloss>
-<gloss>dō-maru</gloss>
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<misc>&hist;</misc>
-<gloss>suit of armour, using such a torso armour</gloss>
+<gloss>light torso armour opening at the right, originally used for infantry combat</gloss>

@@ -13 +13 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1195970">過ぎる・すぎる・1</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1195970">過ぎる・1</xref>
@@ -22 +22 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1195970">過ぎる・すぎる・2</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1195970">過ぎる・2</xref>
@@ -24 +24 @@
-<gloss>to pass (i.e. of time)</gloss>
+<gloss>to pass (of time)</gloss>
@@ -30 +30 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1195970">過ぎる・すぎる・3</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1195970">過ぎる・3</xref>
@@ -39 +39 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1195970">過ぎる・すぎる・4</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1195970">過ぎる・4</xref>

koj, daij, oubunsha kogo jiten

@@ -23,0 +24 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2640260">モテる</xref>

daijs
もて‐き【持て期】
《多く「もて期」「モテ期」と書く》
ngrams

@@ -6,0 +7,6 @@
+<k_ele>
+<keb>もて期</keb>
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>持て期</keb>
+</k_ele>
@@ -8,0 +15,6 @@
+<re_restr>モテ期</re_restr>
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>もてき</reb>
+<re_restr>もて期</re_restr>
+<re_restr>持て期</re_restr>

ngrams
モテ期	35438

I thought I had added this a long time ago but apparently 
not. I've heard it many times on TV.
"with the opposite sex/gender" isn't really ideal because 
if a homosexual man would talk about his モテ期 we would 
naturally assume he's talking about attention from other 
homosexual men

@@ -8 +8 @@
-<reb>もてき</reb>
+<reb>モテき</reb>
@@ -12,2 +12,2 @@
-<misc>&sl;</misc>
-<gloss>the time of life when one is popular (with the opposite gender)</gloss>
+<misc>&col;</misc>
+<gloss>period (of life) when one is enjoying more romantic attention than usual</gloss>

The best single reference I have seen for this is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moteki, though I have seen the reference in other places.

OK. That's simpler.

@@ -15,0 +16 @@
+<gloss>road rage</gloss>
@@ -17,5 +17,0 @@
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<gloss>dangerous driving</gloss>
-<gloss>road rage</gloss>

I don't think it's 2 senses. I think it's 
something that encompasses tailgating and road 
rage, but is mainly about somehow threatening 
the other driver. "dangerous driving" is 
wrong, I believe.

I think that proposed second sense seems to cover it OK.

@@ -20 +20,2 @@
-<gloss>dangerous driving, road rage</gloss>
+<gloss>dangerous driving</gloss>
+<gloss>road rage</gloss>

daijs cont 補説]明確な定義はないが、車間距離を著しく
詰めたり幅寄せを行ったりするほか、不要な急ブレーキ、蛇行
運転、執拗 (しつよう) なパッシングやクラクションの使用
などが該当する。
「あおり【煽り】」の全ての意味を見る

daijs 走行中、他の自動車に対して恐怖感・威圧感を与える
ような運転をすること。

https://nativecamp.net/heync/question/12447
https://context.reverso.net/翻訳/日本語-英語/嘘に決まってるじゃん

encountered as 'kimatte iru ja nai ka' (so without the 'ni'), translated by native friend as 'isn't it obvious?'

@@ -20,0 +21 @@
+<gloss>it's obvious that ...</gloss>

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<reb>きにまっている</reb>
+<reb>にきまっている</reb>

I think that will work. There are 10 sentences linked, but I think they are all for senses 2 are are the に決まっている pattern. I'll fix them.

@@ -5 +5 @@
-<keb>決まっている</keb>
+<keb>に決まっている</keb>
@@ -8 +8 @@
-<keb>決っている</keb>
+<keb>に決っている</keb>
@@ -12 +12 @@
-<reb>きまっている</reb>
+<reb>きにまっている</reb>
@@ -17,10 +16,0 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1591420">決まる・きまる・1</xref>
-<gloss>to be fixed</gloss>
-<gloss>to be determined</gloss>
-<gloss>to be common</gloss>
-<gloss>to be destined</gloss>
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<pos>&exp;</pos>
-<pos>&v1;</pos>
-<s_inf>as 〜に決まっている</s_inf>
@@ -31,7 +20,0 @@
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<pos>&exp;</pos>
-<pos>&v1;</pos>
-<xref type="see" seq="1591420">決まる・4</xref>
-<gloss>to look good (on)</gloss>
-<gloss>to be stylish</gloss>

@@ -12,0 +13 @@
+<misc>&col;</misc>

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2640260">モテる</xref>

モテ度	55179

@@ -12 +12,2 @@
-<gloss>level of popularity (esp. with the opposite sex)</gloss>
+<gloss>level of popularity (with the opposite sex)</gloss>
+<gloss>degree of attractiveness</gloss>

https://www.sugoren.com/search/モテ度
https://www.tofugu.com/japan/the-reason-i-dont-want-to-dye-my-hair-black-again/

A bit of a heteronormative definition but I don't know how else to put it.

Probably not necessarily given the preceding gloss.

didn't really add much I felt?

@@ -20 +20 @@
-<gloss>not trying one's best (due to the perceived low amount of effort required)</gloss>
+<gloss>not trying one's best</gloss>

google images (nsfw)

@@ -20,0 +21,6 @@
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<pos>&vs;</pos>
+<misc>&sl;</misc>
+<gloss>licking (as a part of sexual intercourse)</gloss>

@@ -17,0 +18 @@
+<misc>&sl;</misc>

yes, IMO it doesn't seem common enough to be worth recording at the moment.  maybe in the future

0 n-grams for all 3.

Not sure about this. You can add たん to all sorts of adjectives. In the case of やばい I don't know if it's for one sense or all 4. I'm just not into this sort of slang to make a proper assessment.

@@ -14,0 +15 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2201000">たん・2</xref>

https://meaning.jp/posts/895

Quiet. Yes, more a grammar point, but I'm inclined to let it go in.

http://nihongonosensei.net/?p=18790
言われるがまま	64428

This is more of a grammar point than an expression. される is just one example. See the above link for more.
I'm not sure it's needed but we do have 言われるがまま as an entry.

されるがまま	48251

AFAICT this phrase is rather idiomatic and the meaning is consistent with the proposed glosses. If no-one has further comment I'll approve it.

@@ -10 +10 @@
-<gloss>doing without resistance</gloss>
+<gloss>going along without resistance</gloss>

https://www.weblio.jp/content/されるがまま
https://meaning-book.com/blog/20190722151212.html
https://ejje.weblio.jp/sentence/content/"されるがまま"

In general I agree with dropping the ...が有る versions, but with 13k in the n-grams, I wonder if this shouldn't be allowed through.

人気がある	899216
人気が有る	13864
64:1

Most of our -[の/が]ある entries don't have the 有る form. I suggest standardizing them without it

@@ -6,3 +5,0 @@
-</k_ele>
-<k_ele>
-<keb>人気が有る</keb>

人気が有る	13864

@@ -5,0 +6,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>人気が有る</keb>

人気がある	899216
60 Tanaka sentences

Maybe obvious, but very common.

gg5
G n-grams 899031

https://www.daacs.org/wp-content/uploads/buttons.pdf - "2 Piece: These buttons consist of separate faces and backs that were brazed/soldered or crimped together.  The face and back were often made of different materials."

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>...</gloss>
+<gloss>button back</gloss>

裏ボタン	3262
button body? not sure what this is called in 
English.

Probably.

Better to stick to the passive voice?

@@ -13 +13 @@
-<gloss>would-be crime abandoned before carrying it out</gloss>
+<gloss>would-be crime abandoned before being carried out</gloss>

Oops

@@ -13 +13 @@
-<gloss>would-be crime abandoned carrying it out</gloss>
+<gloss>would-be crime abandoned before carrying it out</gloss>

GG5

@@ -13 +13 @@
-<gloss>voluntary suspension of your own crime prior to completing it</gloss>
+<gloss>would-be crime abandoned carrying it out</gloss>

From a television show on a graduate law school for judges and prosecutors.
1）犯罪が既遂に達する前に自己の意思によりこれを中止すること

https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/中止未遂/#jn-143325
Synonymous with 中止未遂：犯罪の実行に着手した犯人が、自己の意思で実行をやめるか、または結果の発生を防止すること。刑が減軽または免除される。中止犯。
→障害未遂

There could also be new entries for 中止未遂 and 障害未遂.

Not sure whether this should be exp or adv.

リーダーズ+プラス
幸いにも	269194
GG5 examples, 10 Tanaka sentences (out of 48 for 幸い).

Worth having.

@@ -12,0 +13 @@
+<gloss>blessedly</gloss>

https://www.weblio.jp/content/幸いにも
https://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=幸いにも

typo

@@ -19 +19 @@
-<gloss>to to put in all one's effort</gloss>
+<gloss>to put in all one's effort</gloss>

GG5, etc.
総力を挙げる	1122
総力をあげる	606
総力を挙げて	36656
総力をあげて	26548

@@ -16,3 +16,4 @@
-<gloss>to give one's everything (as a group)</gloss>
-<gloss>to put all one's efforts in</gloss>
-<gloss>to have all hands on deck</gloss>
+<s_inf>usu. as 総力を挙げて</s_inf>
+<gloss>to devote all one's energies</gloss>
+<gloss>to give one's everything</gloss>
+<gloss>to to put in all one's effort</gloss>

@@ -17,0 +18 @@
+<gloss>to have all hands on deck</gloss>

https://eow.alc.co.jp/search?q=総力を
https://thesaurus.weblio.jp/content/総力をあげる

If it were kept, we'd need the regular usage as the first sense, and it'd get messy. 
I'm canning it, but I'll delete rather than reject.

it's a reject from me too, but a halfhearted one

That itself indicates a problem with the proposed entry. There are 20 Tanaka sentences containing 反対に but only those two relate to this proposed entry; the other 18 are 反対 in its common adverbial use. There are other common uses of 反対に such as 反対にする and 反対に回る.
The more I look at it, the less useful this proposed entry seems.

There are two sentences with this use:
夏にはたくさん雨が降るが、反対に冬にはほとんど降らない。 We have much rain in summer but on the other hand we have little rain in winter. 
「天気予報では今日は涼しいそうよ」「反対に、暑い気がする」 "The weather forecast says it's cool today." "On the contrary, I feel hot."

GG5: 反対に 〔逆に〕 the 「other [wrong] way; 〔方向〕 in the opposite direction; 〔これに反し〕 on the contrary.

Although GG5 has it indexed, I don't think it's really worth an entry, any more than 反対の or 反対する.

To be honest, I didn't really look at the 
sources very closely but checked with a native 
speaker. That said, the same speaker preferred 
the new glosses.

@@ -16,2 +15,0 @@
-<gloss>to be unsatisfied (with something)</gloss>
-<gloss>to feel conflicted</gloss>
@@ -19,0 +18 @@
+<gloss>to feel conflicted</gloss>

I don't think the two glosses match what the refs say?

@@ -17,0 +18,2 @@
+<gloss>to have something on one's mind</gloss>
+<gloss>to have (undisclosed) reservations</gloss>

@@ -15 +15 @@
-<pos>&v1;</pos>
+<pos>&v5r-i;</pos>

思う所がある	2766
思うところがある	28301
思うところがあって	21485
https://hinative.com/ja/questions/13417029
https://word-dictionary.jp/posts/3828
https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/quest
ion_detail/q1010862480

reverao sentence: しかし、今年、西行は思うところがあ
って、花見を禁止した。
However, this year, Saigyo had his reasons and 
prohibits the cherry blossom viewing.

さっそくですが	50773
早速ですが  183353

A bit obvious, but probably useful

@@ -14,0 +15 @@
+<gloss>getting to the point</gloss>

https://imiwaka.com/2018/12/06/早速ですがの意味やビジネスメールでの使い方！/
https://japanese.stackexchange.com/questions/5067/when-to-use-早速ですが/5078
https://eikaiwa.dmm.com/uknow/questions/4428/
https://driver-times.com/driver_work/driver_biz/1057239

"obsc"?

daijs

釣り花生け	No matches (daijs
釣花生け	No matches (daijs
吊り花生け	38
吊花生け	No matches

cf

釣り花入れ	26 (listed as a synonym in daijs)
吊り花入れ	26

https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/23430/lot/79/
A TSURI HANA-IKE (HANGING VASE FOR FLOWER ARRANGING)

https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/person-
in-need
person in need means a person whose 
requirements for basic needs, special needs 
and employment services as prescribed in the 
Regulations exceed the income, assets and 
other resources available to that person as 
determined pursuant to the Regulations;
 (not quite the same but this is anyway less 
ambiguous than "needy person")

I read the kotobank entries a little closer 
and I think this is better. e.g. daijs -自立支
援制度: 経済的に困窮し、_生活保護に至る可能性のある人
_を対象に、i.e. they are not yet at the stage 
of econonic hardship where they qualify for 
economic assistance, as I understand it. so 
"destitute" is maybe going a little too far. 
same here:
https://www.mizuho-
ir.co.jp/publication/report/2018/mhir15_konky
u_01.html
1.生活困窮者とは
生活困窮者―つまり支援対象者―の定義は、法第2条において
「現に経済的に困窮し、最低限度の_生活を維持することが
できなくなるおそれのある者_」（1）と規定されているのみ
で、具体的な要件等は明示されていない。 (my emphasis)

@@ -12,7 +12,3 @@
-<gloss>needy person</gloss>
-<gloss>destitute person</gloss>
-<gloss>person living in poverty</gloss>
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<gloss>person struggling to lead a normal (healthy) life</gloss>
+<field>&law;</field>
+<gloss>person in need</gloss>
+<gloss>person facing economic hardship</gloss>

I'll make that a second sense.

@@ -14,0 +15,4 @@
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<gloss>person struggling to lead a normal (healthy) life</gloss>

I saw this uses to describe "self-neglecters,” 
who weren't necessarily poor (many had full-
time employment). it also includes people like 
hikikomori where money often isn't the most 
acute peoblem. "make a living" just means 
"earn money", of course, so it wasn't ideal 
either, come to think of it.
how does something like "person struggling to 
lead a normal (healthy) life" sound?

gg5, reverso examples

"(poor and) needy" looks like an adjective gloss. Could add the definite article but probably best to stick to the singular form.

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>(poor and) needy</gloss>
+<gloss>needy person</gloss>
@@ -14 +14 @@
-<gloss>person struggling to make a living (due to poverty, etc.)</gloss>
+<gloss>person living in poverty</gloss>

GG5, ルミナス

wadoku, chujiten
化学消防車	23633
most of the hits in English for "chemical fire engine" seem to talk about them as a historic thing.

jawiki
化学消防車	23633
化学車	4361

Can't find much support for "grapevine stretch" outside the Japanese Wikipedia article.

@@ -12,3 +12,2 @@
-<field>&sports;</field>
-<gloss>octopus hold (wrestling)</gloss>
-<gloss>grapevine stretch</gloss>
+<field>&prowres;</field>
+<gloss>octopus hold</gloss>

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/卍固め
卍固め	12172

@@ -12 +12,2 @@
-<gloss>octopus hold</gloss>
+<field>&sports;</field>
+<gloss>octopus hold (wrestling)</gloss>

Wikipedia

Wrestling move

即完	10111
即日完売	48311 <- in GG5, etc.

Better to have 即日完売 as an entry too. Aligning.

@@ -12,0 +13 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2847492">即日完売</xref>
@@ -15,2 +16,2 @@
-<s_inf>abbr. of 即日完売</s_inf>
-<gloss>selling out immediately</gloss>
+<gloss>same-day sellout</gloss>
+<gloss>selling out on the first day (of sale)</gloss>

jitsuyo wadoku

年間パスポート	35731
年間パス 	23335

年間パスポート	35731
年間パス 	23335
https://s.usj.co.jp/ticket/apass/

I agree. I see there are two Tanaka sentences, which I'll index to this. They both use 時間が経つの, which accounts for about 30% of the use of this expression.

Outside of this, we also have 時間が開く and 時間
がかかる. I don't think it hurts to include 
extremely common collocations like this one.

時が経つ	112419

Is this needed? It's an extremely basic sentence. It's also not the only way of saying "time passes".

時間が経つ	385444	  
時間が経っ	327026	  
時間が経って	248995

Not exactly idiomatic. but very common.

時間が経つ	385505

Interesting discussion over the past week or so, but I still think it's worth having.

ハイパー英語辞書 also has「時間が経つにつれて」as "gradually"
eij also has an entry for "時間がたつにつれ" without the て
実用・現代用語和英辞典 has "▼時間が経つにつれて as time goes on" as a subentry in its 時間がたつ entry.

prog ei-wa:
"with [given] time
時がたつにつれて，そのうち，やがて"

other constructions meaning much the same thing are much less common in the ngrams:
時間が経つにつれて	44996
時間がたつにつれて	19033
_
時が経つにつれて　	10426
時がたつにつれて　	3350
時間がたつとともに	847
時間が経つと共に　	1136
時間が経つとともに	1709
時間がたつと共に　	226
年月が経つにつれて	1279
年月がたつにつれて	456
時の経過とともに　	5369　(in the goo collocation dic)
時の経過と共に　　	2960　('')
時間の経過につれて	1097　
時の経過につれて 	123　 
日がたつにつれて 	4609
年がたつにつれて 	390



the fact that this one particular phrasing is so much more common than several other perfectly acceptable ways of saying the same thing does 
make it a set phrase, to my mind. (I also feel 時が経つにつれて is a set phrase and wouldn't oppose including it as an entry)

"Although JMdict does have Japanese users, the dictionary is not aimed at them. Our criteria for inclusion makes no mention of native speakers. I 
don't think it should be a factor here (or on any proposed entry)."
I disagree Japanese users shouldn't be a factor (but it's true they're not mentioned in the criteria for inclusion). 
(side-track, but I've been thinking about ways to make the dictionary more useful for Japanese people, like replacing things like [note="also 
written X"] with [note_also_written="X"], etc. so that more notes could be translated into Japanese with less effort.)

@@ -19,0 +20 @@
+<gloss>with time</gloss>

I don't think I would describe it as a set phrase. It's very much a sum of parts expression, with no figurative or idiomatic component (時間が[time]経つ[passes]につれて[as]). I'm not seeing a reason for adding it.
Although JMdict does have Japanese users, the dictionary is not aimed at them. Our criteria for inclusion makes no mention of native speakers. I don't think it should be a factor here (or on any proposed entry).

@@ -5,0 +6,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>時間がたつにつれて</keb>

eij has this btw (as　時間がたつにつれて	19033)

I think we both agree it's a common set 
phrase? Like you said, any proficient speaker 
of Japanese should know this phrase. I don't 
know if it's relecant to decide how much of a 
set phrase it is by comparing it to the 
English "as time passes". 
Rene has a point, but this dictionary has 
Japanese users too who are not unlikely to try 
and look up how to say this in English. 
(actually, the first thing google suggested 
for me for 時間が経つにつれて was ... 英語)

Daijs

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

https://www.weblio.jp/content/埋却

Word popped up in a news article about disposing of chickens infected with bird flu, and seems to usually refer to infected corpses. 
Often used with 埋却処分 which is the disposal of infected corpses.

I think "third wave" is pushing it.

May as well have the third.

heard on tv

since we have "second wave"?
we could also add the currently relevant 第三
波, possibly?

GG5, 中辞典
即完	10111
即日完売	48311

gg5, eij

@@ -14,2 +14,2 @@
-<gloss>would rather</gloss>
-<gloss>by preference</gloss>
+<gloss>preferably</gloss>
+<gloss>if circumstances allow</gloss>

成るべくなら	495

@@ -5 +5 @@
-<keb>成可なら</keb>
+<keb>成るべくなら</keb>

なるべくなら	76456
GG5, Eijiro, ルミナス

1 Tanaka sentence.

@@ -13,0 +14,2 @@
+<gloss>would rather</gloss>
+<gloss>by preference</gloss>

Adding spec1
-*- via bulkupd.py -*-

@@ -8,0 +9 @@
+<re_pri>spec1</re_pri>

Thanks. I'll add "group" to the list for the next update.

Not seeing anything online. If they don't have an official English name, we probably shouldn't invent our own.
I think we need a [group] name type. Also useful for musical groups/bands. They're not really organisations.

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>Animal Ladder (?) (comedy duo)</gloss>
+<gloss>Animal Teidan (comedy duo)</gloss>

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/アニマル梯団

Any idea what they are called in English (if anything?)
Certainly not a "person".

@@ -11,2 +11,2 @@
-<misc>&person;</misc>
-<gloss>Animaruteidan</gloss>
+<misc>&organization;</misc>
+<gloss>Animal Ladder (?) (comedy duo)</gloss>

Common surname

@@ -10,0 +11,4 @@
+<sense>
+<misc>&surname;</misc>
+<gloss>Pinto</gloss>
+</sense>

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/フェルナン・メンデス・ピント

@@ -8,2 +8,3 @@
-<misc>&unclass;</misc>
-<gloss>Fernan</gloss>
+<misc>&male;</misc>
+<gloss>Fernán</gloss>
+<gloss>Fernão</gloss>