daij, meikyo, chujiten, prog, luminous

@@ -21,4 +21,4 @@
-<sense>
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<gloss>hunting</gloss>
-</sense>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>がり</reb>
+<re_inf>&sk;</re_inf>
+</r_ele>
@@ -28,3 +28,18 @@
-<gloss>harvesting (e.g. berries, fruit)</gloss>
-<gloss>picking</gloss>
-<gloss>gathering</gloss>
+<s_inf>pronounced がり as a suffix</s_inf>
+<gloss>hunting</gloss>
+<gloss>hunt</gloss>
+<gloss>shooting</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n-suf;</pos>
+<s_inf>pronounced がり</s_inf>
+<gloss>gathering (mushrooms, shellfish, etc.)</gloss>
+<gloss>picking (berries, fruit, etc.)</gloss>
+<gloss>viewing (e.g. autumn leaves)</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n-suf;</pos>
+<s_inf>pronounced がり</s_inf>
+<gloss>hunting down (a criminal, etc.)</gloss>
+<gloss>rounding up (e.g. communists)</gloss>
+<gloss>witch-hunt</gloss>

Daijr/s, koj and meikyo have 猟

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーーーー─┬────────┬───────╮
│ 狩りに行っ │ 73,114 │ 94.1% │
│ 狩に行っ　 │  3,341 │  4.3% │
│ かりに行っ │    694 │  0.9% │
│ 猟に行っ　 │    542 │  0.7% │ - add, rK
╰─ーーーーー─┴────────┴───────╯

@@ -10,0 +11,4 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>猟</keb>
+<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>

中辞典

@@ -22,0 +23,2 @@
+<pos>&n-suf;</pos>
+<gloss>harvesting (e.g. berries, fruit)</gloss>
@@ -24 +26 @@
-<gloss>harvesting (e.g. berries, fruit)</gloss>
+<gloss>gathering</gloss>

包茎	709,012		
包莖	0

@@ -9 +9 @@
-<ke_inf>&oK;</ke_inf>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
@@ -19 +18,0 @@
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos>

新和英中辞典 has "foreskin; prepuce", but no other ref has.

koj, daij, gg5, eij, wiki, etc.

a condition of the foreskin.  not the foreskin itself.  i had a friend who had this when he was in high school and had to get a circumcision at the age of 16.

@@ -14,0 +14,3 @@
+<r_ele>
+<reb>ほうきょう</reb>
+</r_ele>
@@ -17,1 +20,1 @@
-<field>&anat;</field>
+<field>&med;</field>
@@ -19,2 +22,0 @@
-<gloss>prepuce</gloss>
-<gloss>foreskin</gloss>

@@ -17,0 +17,1 @@
+<field>&anat;</field>

新和英中辞典

A little less obscure gloss. Merging in 1515570.

@@ -6,0 +6,4 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>包莖</keb>
+<ke_inf>&oK;</ke_inf>
@@ -14,0 +18,2 @@
+<gloss>prepuce</gloss>
+<gloss>foreskin</gloss>

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."

@@ -8 +8 @@
-<keb>カ国語</keb>
+<keb>か国語</keb>
@@ -11 +11 @@
-<keb>か国語</keb>
+<keb>カ国語</keb>

ヶ国語	192710	38.0%
カ国語	128910	25.4%
か国語	157396	31.0%
ヵ国語	23295	4.6%
ケ国語	4381	0.9%
箇国語	232	0.0%

@@ -14,0 +15 @@
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
@@ -17,0 +19 @@
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
@@ -20,0 +23 @@
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>

G n-grams:
ヶ国語	192710
カ国語	128910
か国語	157396
ヵ国語	 23295
ケ国語	  4381
箇国語	   232

@@ -3,0 +4,3 @@
+<k_ele>
+<keb>ヶ国語</keb>
+</k_ele>
@@ -8 +11 @@
-<keb>ヶ国語</keb>
+<keb>か国語</keb>
@@ -11 +14 @@
-<keb>か国語</keb>
+<keb>ヵ国語</keb>

Entry created

キャインキャイン	1,512
きゃいんきゃいん	288

see 2523810

@@ -14,0 +15,7 @@
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>キャインキャイン</reb>
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>きゃいんきゃいん</reb>
+<re_inf>&sk;</re_inf>

daijs

@@ -17 +17,2 @@
-<pos>&int;</pos>
+<pos>&adv;</pos>
+<pos>&adv-to;</pos>
@@ -19,2 +20,2 @@
-<gloss>yelp</gloss>
-<gloss>yap</gloss>
+<gloss>yelping</gloss>
+<gloss>yapping</gloss>

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

@@ -13 +13 @@
-<gloss>1st wedding anniversary</gloss>
+<gloss>first wedding anniversary</gloss>

@@ -12,0 +13 @@
+<gloss>1st wedding anniversary</gloss>

Entry created

@@ -16 +16 @@
-<gloss>2nd wedding anniversary</gloss>
+<gloss>second wedding anniversary</gloss>

G n-grams:

藁婚式　 656 89.1%
わら婚式  80 10.9%
ワラ婚式   0  0.0%

@@ -5,0 +6,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>わら婚式</keb>
@@ -12,0 +16 @@
+<gloss>2nd wedding anniversary</gloss>

Entry created

Kokugos

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

Entry created

RP: キャ(イ)ン

@@ -14,0 +15 @@
+<re_inf>&sk;</re_inf>
@@ -22,0 +24 @@
+<gloss>yipe</gloss>

キャン	255,953
きゃん	56,106
キャイン	4,142
きゃいん	810

https://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/word/en/キャイン/

@@ -8,0 +9,6 @@
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>キャイン</reb>
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>きゃいん</reb>

@@ -14,0 +15 @@
+<gloss>yap</gloss>

gg5
https://castel.jp/p/9188
ディズニーの春キャンとは、東京ディズニーリゾートが販売する「春のキャンパスデーパスポート」の略称です。

Splitting on source word.
I checked the Disneyland link using the Wayback Machine and the example is 春キャン, an abbreviation for 春のキャンパスデーパスポート. I can't find any evidence that キャン is used as an abbreviation for キャンペーン.

@@ -5,0 +6,3 @@
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>きゃん</reb>
@@ -12,12 +14,0 @@
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<xref type="see" seq="1042250">キャンペーン・1</xref>
-<misc>&abbr;</misc>
-<gloss>sales campaign</gloss>
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<pos>&n;</pos>
-<lsource xml:lang="chi"/>
-<gloss>kiang (Equus hemionus kiang)</gloss>
-<gloss>kyang</gloss>

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/異端審問
宗教裁判	8,909		
異端審問	19,689

Dropping x-ref.

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1708080">宗教裁判</xref>
+<misc>&hist;</misc>

GG5, Daijirin

OK, I'll put the previous one back.

@@ -18 +18 @@
-<s_inf>pun on イケメン using 育児(イク) and メン(men)</s_inf>
+<s_inf>pun on 育児 and イケメン</s_inf>

daijr (イケメン):「いけ」は「いけてる」の略、「めん」は「面」と「men」を掛けた言葉。

The kokugos say that the メン in イケメン comes from 面 as well as "men".
I think the original note was fine.

Maybe this.

@@ -18 +18 @@
-<s_inf>pun on 育児 and イケメン</s_inf>
+<s_inf>pun on イケメン using 育児(イク) and メン(men)</s_inf>

Perhaps you could say
"Pun on イケメン using イク as in 育児 and メン as in メンズ"

「イクメン」とは「子育てする男性(メンズ)」の略語。
https://kotobank.jp/word/イクメン-188869

""Ikumen" (育児・子育てをするメンズ) is used for men taking on parenting roles, while "Ikemen" (イケメン) refers to someone who's easy on the eyes."
https://www.quora.com/What-is-a-popular-word-or-phrase-that-is-often-misused/answer/Satoka-Sotome

Regarding: "pun on 育児 and イケメン"
It's also a pun on メンズ, isn't it? 
(The メン in イケメン refers to the face (面), not "men; males".)

gg5: 人をナイフで一突きする | stab sb with a knife; plunge a knife into sb

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーーーーー─┬───────╮
│ 　一突きする │   739 │
│ を一突きする │   329 │
├─ーーーーーー─┼───────┤
│ 　一突きし　 │ 1,476 │
│ を一突きし　 │   713 │
╰─ーーーーーー─┴───────╯

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

Encountered this as ひと突き

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーーー─┬────────┬───────╮
│ 一突き　 │ 21,549 │ 86.5% │
│ ひと突き │  3,373 │ 13.5% │ - add, sK
╰─ーーーー─┴────────┴───────╯

@@ -5,0 +6,4 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>ひと突き</keb>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>

GG5, 新和英中辞典

Better to have it as the base noun (一突き), and indicate the verbal form with "vs". Quite acceptable as an entry.

@@ -5,1 +5,1 @@
-<keb>一突きする</keb>
+<keb>一突き</keb>
@@ -8,1 +8,1 @@
-<reb>ひとつきする</reb>
+<reb>ひとつき</reb>
@@ -11,3 +11,5 @@
-<pos>&exp;</pos>
-<gloss>give someone a thrust</gloss>
-<gloss>lunge at</gloss>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<pos>&vs;</pos>
+<gloss>stab</gloss>
+<gloss>thrust</gloss>
+<gloss>lunge</gloss>

This gets a fair number of Google hits. It is only a + b, but the problem for the searcher is the reading. Is it "ひと" or is it "いち" or what in front of "突きする"? I know Rene believes that the searcher should look up such things eleswhere. I know there is a limit to what one can do with such matters. Perhaps one should have the entry for "一" giving a fuller explanation of all the options and most usual outcomes in terms of usage. Of course, we don't have this problem in dictionaries generally because when one get the sound of "one" for "1" that is all one really needs within reason.

I hesitated before making this submission because I somewhat guessed the result, however when I dicovered the high number of entries with "一" as the prefix, I thought that I would give it a go, for example see a small selection of other existing entries:-

一度(P); ひと度; 一たび; 一とたび(io) 【いちど(一度)(P); ひとたび】 (n-adv) (1) once; one time; on one occasion; (2) (ひとたび only) temporarily; for a moment; (3) (いちど only) one degree; one tone; one musical interval; (P) 
一ヶ月; 一箇月(oK); 一か月; 一ケ月 【いっかげつ】 (n) one month 
一つ目 【ひとつめ】 (adj-no) one-eyed 

I would like to see your site as the "one-stop" location for the needs of the Japanese language searcher, but I do understand that limits have to be place somewhere.

Anyway, as usual, I appreciate your site because I have not found any better source of information; nor indeed a more user friendly means for anyone, whatsoever their status of understanding, making a contribution.

@@ -9,0 +10 @@
+<pos>&vi;</pos>

The tag is useful.

daijs
リスポーン	2256	  
リスポーンし	331	  
リスポーンする	227

@@ -13 +13 @@
-<gloss>2nd wedding anniversary</gloss>
+<gloss>second wedding anniversary</gloss>

Seems the 2nd is both 綿婚式 and 藁婚式.
I'll lock this in, then reopen for a bit. I think we've probably done the main ones of these now.

@@ -12,0 +13 @@
+<gloss>2nd wedding anniversary</gloss>

That seems reasonable. I'll approve this and reopen to keep it visible.

You MUST provide some!!
A couple of kanwas point to 蔵書.
蔵書	535591
収書	4420

@@ -12 +12,3 @@
-<gloss>collection</gloss>
+<xref type="see" seq="1403510">蔵書</xref>
+<misc>&rare;</misc>
+<gloss>collection of books</gloss>

We don't use [med] for slang terms.

@@ -10 +9,0 @@
-<field>&med;</field>

Oh.

@@ -9,0 +10 @@
+<field>&med;</field>

https://www.mens-life-clinic.com/column/column10/
ドリチンとは「包茎のちんちん」の俗称

https://www.norst.co.jp/content/phimosis/1019
包茎は「ドリチン」と言われることもあります。

https://www.cinderella-group.com/column/dorichin
「ドリチン」は「包茎」の隠語、俗称です。

https://steron.jp/11026/
ドリチンの状態を一言で表すのであれば、包茎状態のペニスです。

https://mens.fairclinic.jp/column/dorichin/
「ドリチン」は皮の余りでペニスの先端がドリルのように見える「包茎の状態」です。

I don't think a Christianity tag is appropriate here. It's a historical term related to the Catholic Church as opposed to a term used in the Christian faith.

@@ -16 +15,0 @@
-<field>&Christn;</field>

Quiet

宗教裁判	8909
宗教裁判所	1196
GG5, 中辞典

@@ -13,0 +14,6 @@
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>
+<field>&Christn;</field>
+<misc>&hist;</misc>
+<gloss>the Inquisition</gloss>
+</sense>

gg5
G n-grams: 1,196

GG5: 腹心の友 a close friend; a confidant; a steadfast and trusted friend
中辞典: one's bosom [trusted] friend
腹心の友	1408

Please provide references with proposed entries.

@@ -10,0 +11 @@
+<pos>&exp;</pos>
@@ -11,0 +13,2 @@
+<gloss>close friend</gloss>
+<gloss>trusted friend</gloss>

I could not find any reference to this being used as a surname. Probably a duplication of entry 5541003.

https://www.city.osaka.lg.jp/kensetsu/page/0000011249.html
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/天保山

The reading seems to come from 天保 era, which is when this mountain was created.

@@ -8 +8 @@
-<reb>てんぽざん</reb>
+<reb>てんぽうざん</reb>
@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>Tenpozan</gloss>
+<gloss>Tenpōzan</gloss>