Better

daijs: 二つを比べてすぐれている方。

I'd gloss it like this.

@@ -35,3 +35,2 @@
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
-<gloss>superior</gloss>
-<gloss>better</gloss>
+<gloss>the right (wing)</gloss>
+<gloss>rightist</gloss>
@@ -41,2 +40 @@
-<gloss>the right (wing)</gloss>
-<gloss>rightist</gloss>
+<gloss>the better (of two)</gloss>

daijs #6

@@ -31,0 +32,6 @@
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
+<gloss>superior</gloss>
+<gloss>better</gloss>

prog
過小	247,532		
過小な	2,932		
過小に	9,489		
過小の	869

Dropping adj-no.

@@ -12 +11,0 @@
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
@@ -14,0 +14 @@
+<gloss>too little</gloss>

daijr/s

Not a noun.

@@ -12 +11,0 @@
-<pos>&n;</pos>
@@ -13,0 +13 @@
+<xref type="ant" seq="1196250">過大</xref>

Daijisen:「お」や「御 (ご) 」の付いた自分の行為を表す体言に付けて、その行為の対象を敬う。
JE examples.

daijisen

@@ -36,0 +37 @@
+<s_inf>after a word beginning with お- or ご-</s_inf>

Aligning sense part-of-speech information

@@ -33,0 +34 @@
+<pos>&v1;</pos>

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."

gg5, daij

@@ -15 +15 @@
-<gloss>sinking a ship instantly</gloss>
+<gloss>sinking instantly (of a ship due to a torpedo attack, bombing, etc.)</gloss>

Meikyo vt and vi additions to n,vs entries
-*- via bulkupd.py -*-

@@ -12,0 +13,2 @@
+<pos>&vt;</pos>
+<pos>&vi;</pos>

GG5 xrefs too.

豪華絢爛　118,496
絢爛豪華　50,909

実用日本語表現辞典
「豪華絢爛」（ごうかけんらん）に同じ。

@@ -12,0 +13 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1809750">豪華絢爛</xref>

Kanji Haitani list

Adding yoji tagAdding yoji tag
-*- via bulkupd.py -*-

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

Entry created

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーーーー─┬─────────┬───────╮
│ 麗らか　　 │  13,787 │  9.5% │
│ 麗か　　　 │   3,062 │  2.1% │ - [io] to [sK]
│ うららか　 │ 127,731 │ 88.3% │
├─ーーーーー─┼─────────┼───────┤
│ 麗らかな　 │   9,339 │ 11.4% │
│ 麗かな　　 │   1,418 │  1.7% │
│ うららかな │  70,935 │ 86.8% │
├─ーーーーー─┼─────────┼───────┤
│ 麗らかに　 │     922 │ 13.8% │
│ 麗かに　　 │     171 │  2.6% │
│ うららかに │   5,571 │ 83.6% │
╰─ーーーーー─┴─────────┴───────╯

@@ -9 +9 @@
-<ke_inf>&io;</ke_inf>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>

gg5, prog, daij

@@ -17 +17,3 @@
-<gloss>bright</gloss>
+<gloss>bright (weather, mood, voice, etc.)</gloss>
+<gloss>clear</gloss>
+<gloss>fine</gloss>
@@ -19 +20,0 @@
-<gloss>fine</gloss>
@@ -20,0 +22,2 @@
+<gloss>splendid</gloss>
+<gloss>cheerful</gloss>

Indeed.

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalist_government

@@ -12,2 +12,2 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2109320">中国国民党</xref>
-<gloss>Nationalist Government (of China; i.e. under the Kuomintang)</gloss>
+<misc>&hist;</misc>
+<gloss>Nationalist Government (of the Republic of China; 1924-1948)</gloss>

Entry created

実用日本語表現辞典

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

@@ -15,1 +15,1 @@
-<gloss>female cabaret club employee</gloss>
+<gloss>hostess (in a hostess bar)</gloss>

Entry created

Quiet

Maybe this. Could be two senses.

@@ -14,2 +14,2 @@
-<gloss>free-to-play (player)</gloss>
-<gloss>F2P</gloss>
+<gloss>free-to-play player</gloss>
+<gloss>F2P player</gloss>

"F2P player" is common online. Lots of reddit hits.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ClashRoyale/comments/1b1hm0e/f2p_players_why_do_you_still_play/

@@ -13,0 +14,2 @@
+<gloss>free-to-play (player)</gloss>
+<gloss>F2P</gloss>

jitsuyou: 課金制のサービス、特にオンラインゲームやSNSなどにおいて、課金サービスを全く利用しないこと、あるいはそのユーザーを意味して用いられている語。
https://dic.pixiv.net/a/無課金

I think "free-to-play" is misleading. 無課金 describes players/users or playstyles, not the games themselves.

@@ -11 +10,0 @@
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
@@ -13,3 +12,2 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1195770">課金・かきん・2</xref>
-<gloss>free-to-play</gloss>
-<gloss>without paying</gloss>
+<xref type="see" seq="1195770">課金・2</xref>
+<gloss>not paying for virtual goods or premium features (in a video game, on a social networking service, etc.)</gloss>

sankoku/koj/nikk tag this as 自

@@ -27 +27 @@
-<pos>&vt;</pos>
+<pos>&vi;</pos>
@@ -33 +33 @@
-<pos>&vt;</pos>
+<pos>&vi;</pos>
@@ -39 +39 @@
-<pos>&vt;</pos>
+<pos>&vi;</pos>

Seems like かむがかる is only in nikk

@@ -24,3 +23,0 @@
-</r_ele>
-<r_ele>
-<reb>かむがかる</reb>

The 憑 form is in daijr/s, koj, gg5. We wouldn't normally hide it.

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーーーー─┬────────┬───────╮
│ 神がかっ　 │ 45,455 │ 81.7% │
│ 神懸かっ　 │  6,816 │ 12.3% │
│ 神懸っ　　 │  2,766 │  5.0% │ - [rK] to [sK]
│ 神憑っ　　 │    299 │  0.5% │ - [sK] to [rK]
│ 神憑かっ　 │    157 │  0.3% │ - add, sK
│ かみがかっ │    138 │  0.2% │
│ かむがかっ │      0 │  0.0% │
╰─ーーーーー─┴────────┴───────╯

@@ -11 +11 @@
-<keb>神懸る</keb>
+<keb>神憑る</keb>
@@ -15 +15,5 @@
-<keb>神憑る</keb>
+<keb>神懸る</keb>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>神憑かる</keb>

@@ -23 +23 @@
-<gloss>on the rocks</gloss>
+<gloss>on the rocks (drink)</gloss>

missed this freq tag

@@ -6,0 +7 @@
+<re_pri>ichi1</re_pri>

def more common than "lock"

@@ -5,0 +6 @@
+<re_pri>gai1</re_pri>

Almost all the examples are for the "music" sense.

@@ -9 +9 @@
-<gloss>rock</gloss>
+<gloss>rock (music)</gloss>
@@ -13 +13,3 @@
-<gloss>rock (music)</gloss>
+<gloss>rock</gloss>
+<gloss>boulder</gloss>
+<gloss>stone</gloss>

Quiet

https://www.ichi.gr.jp/c/silver/choker/gozame-t/gd680
WWW images.
茣蓙目	25
ござ目	3030 - false positives

I think something like this is closer.

@@ -5,0 +6,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>ござ目</keb>
@@ -12 +15 @@
-<gloss>type of etchings on koban coins</gloss>
+<gloss>rush matting pattern (often on metal or coins)</gloss>

daijr

GG5, 中辞典 (subentry under 馬術), Eijiro

(cannot find it in GG5 or koj)

https://ejje.weblio.jp/content/馬術競技

a+b but common:

馬術競技	19339

神がかる (神懸かる;神懸る;...) is already an entry, and this is an inflected version of the first sense.

https://www.wordreference.com/jaen/神がかった
https://context.reverso.net/translation/japanese-english/神がかった

神がかった	14490

https://blogmae.com/ieltsblog-criteria-for-speaking-examiner/
https://books.jitsumu.co.jp/book/b639118.html
https://www.baitoru.com/kw/採点官　バイト/
採点官	5,000		
採点者	18,176

https://seniorad-marketing.com/senior-blog/senior-pokemongo/
https://www.itmedia.co.jp/mobile/articles/2405/27/news145.html

Newer than ngrams.

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/王立誠

https://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000065.html

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>Ou Rissei (33.11-)</gloss>
+<gloss>Wang Li Chen (1958.11.7-; professional go player)</gloss>

incorrect reading

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/呉清源

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>Goseigen</gloss>
+<gloss>Wu Qing Yuan (1914.6.12-2014.11.30; professional go player)</gloss>

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/林海峰

@@ -5,0 +6,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>林海峯</keb>

https://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000009.html

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>Rin Kaihou (1942.5-)</gloss>
+<gloss>Lin Hai Fong (1942.5.6-; professional go player)</gloss>

https://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000187.html

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>Chō Sonjin (1970.4-)</gloss>
+<gloss>Cho Son-jin (1970.4.18-; professional go player)</gloss>

chou conversion
-*- via bulkupd.py -*-

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>Chou Sonjin (1970.4-)</gloss>
+<gloss>Chō Sonjin (1970.4-)</gloss>

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/井山裕太

https://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000439.html

@@ -5 +5 @@
-<reb>スティーブ・ジョブズ</reb>
+<reb>スティーブジョブズ</reb>
@@ -8 +8 @@
-<reb>スティーブジョブズ</reb>
+<reb>スティーブ・ジョブズ</reb>
@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>Steve Jobs</gloss>
+<gloss>Steve Jobs (1955-2011; co-founder of Apple)</gloss>

ja wiki:
>> 親戚	キンバル・マスク（弟）

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimball_(given_name)
>> Kimball (variants: Kembal, Kembel, Kembell, Kemble, Kembold, Kembolde, Kemple, Kimbal, Kimball, Kimbel, Kimble) is a relatively common English language surname – it is also a given name, although relatively rare.

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーーー─┬────╮
│ キンバル │ 95 │
│ キンボル │  0 │ - already an entry (Kimball)
╰─ーーーー─┴────╯

Merging with Kimball (キンボル)

@@ -6,0 +7,3 @@
+<r_ele>
+<reb>キンボル</reb>
+</r_ele>
@@ -8 +10,0 @@
-<misc>&male;</misc>
@@ -9,0 +12,2 @@
+<misc>&given;</misc>
+<gloss>Kimball</gloss>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimbal_Musk

First name of the brother of Elon Musk

@@ -11 +11 @@
-<misc>&person;</misc>
+<misc>&char;</misc>

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/ダース・ベイダー

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>Taiwan Nationalist Party</gloss>
+<gloss>Taiwan Nationalist Party (dissolved 2020)</gloss>

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/台湾国民党
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_Nationalist_Party

Not Kuomintang. This is a different party. Dissolved in 2020. I don't think it's needed in jmdict.

@@ -1,3 +1,2 @@
-<ent_corp type="jmdict">jmdict</ent_corp>
-<ent_seq>2109330</ent_seq>
+<ent_corp type="jmnedict">jmnedict</ent_corp>
@@ -11,3 +10,2 @@
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<xref type="see" seq="2109320">中国国民党</xref>
-<gloss>Kuomintang (Taiwanese Nationalist Party)</gloss>
+<misc>&organization;</misc>
+<gloss>Taiwan Nationalist Party</gloss>

Entry created

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/ピーター・ティール

https://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000174.html

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>Castle Itter, Austria</gloss>
+<gloss>Itter Castle (Austria)</gloss>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Castle_Itter

https://www.pokemongo.jp/

@@ -5,0 +6 @@
+<re_pri>spec1</re_pri>

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/セスナ