Rejecting this empty edit because I think it makes the edit history look confusing.

daijisen, koj

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simoom
>> Alternative spellings include samoon, samun, simoun, and simoon

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーーー─┬────────╮
│ シムーン │ 35,644 │
│ シムーム │      0 │
╰─ーーーー─┴────────╯

Not sure how many alt spellings we need.
We could also add a meteorology tag.

@@ -9 +9,2 @@
-<gloss>simoon</gloss>
+<lsource xml:lang="ara">samūm</lsource>
+<gloss>simoom (desert wind)</gloss>

I don't think it needs a tag. It's not tagged in GG5.
Splitting out かべん. Neater this way.
"flower" is redundant.

@@ -18,4 +17,0 @@
-<keb>花瓣</keb>
-<ke_inf>&oK;</ke_inf>
-</k_ele>
-<k_ele>
@@ -23 +19 @@
-<ke_inf>&oK;</ke_inf>
+<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>
@@ -27,4 +22,0 @@
-<re_restr>花びら</re_restr>
-<re_restr>花弁</re_restr>
-<re_restr>花片</re_restr>
-<re_restr>瓣</re_restr>
@@ -35,5 +26,0 @@
-<r_ele>
-<reb>かべん</reb>
-<re_restr>花弁</re_restr>
-<re_restr>花瓣</re_restr>
-</r_ele>
@@ -42,2 +29 @@
-<field>&bot;</field>
-<gloss>(flower) petal</gloss>
+<gloss>petal</gloss>

@@ -41,0 +42 @@
+<field>&bot;</field>

Moved from 1194930.

@@ -11,0 +12,4 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>花片</keb>
+<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>
@@ -24,0 +29 @@
+<re_restr>花片</re_restr>

gg5

@@ -12 +12,5 @@
-<gloss>corolla (of flower)</gloss>
+<field>&bot;</field>
+<gloss>corolla</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
+<pos>&n;</pos>

gg5, prog

@@ -17,0 +18 @@
+<gloss>globular</gloss>

@@ -14,0 +15 @@
+<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
@@ -16,5 +16,0 @@
-<gloss>shape of a globe</gloss>
-<gloss>globe shape</gloss>
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
@@ -21,0 +18 @@
+<gloss>globe-shaped</gloss>

JWN, GG5 (uses クワ in an explanation in another entry.)

@@ -13,0 +14,4 @@
+<r_ele>
+<reb>クワ</reb>
+<re_nokanji/>
+</r_ele>

The fact that it lingers on in one forum doesn't stop it being an archaism in general. I think that gloss was appropriate.

@@ -27,2 +27,2 @@
-<misc>&form;</misc>
-<s_inf>only used among members of the Japanese Diet</s_inf>
+<misc>&arch;</misc>
+<s_inf>still used among members of the Japanese Diet</s_inf>

If it's still used, [arch] doesn't seem right. Maybe this works?

@@ -27,2 +27,2 @@
-<misc>&arch;</misc>
-<s_inf>still used among members of the Japanese Diet</s_inf>
+<misc>&form;</misc>
+<s_inf>only used among members of the Japanese Diet</s_inf>

It's not the name that's of equal/lower status.

@@ -14 +14 @@
-<s_inf>after a male's name of equal or lower status</s_inf>
+<s_inf>after the name of a male of equal or lower status</s_inf>
@@ -21 +21 @@
-<s_inf>after a female's name of lower status; used by males in formal settings</s_inf>
+<s_inf>after the name of a female of lower status; used by males in formal settings</s_inf>

I feel it should somehow reflect that it's commonly used by schoolkids, but I can't think how to do it.

@@ -20,0 +21 @@
+<field>&bot;</field>

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

@@ -19,0 +20 @@
+<pos>&vi;</pos>

gg5, prog, daij
jwiki: "一般的には受粉であるが、植物が受動的に花粉を受けることを「受粉」、花粉が媒体を介して被子植物の柱頭・裸子植物の胚珠に移動することを「授粉」と区別することもある。"

All the JEs go with "pollination".
I've added 授粉 but it's actually a separate entry in the kokugos (understandably). Daijr redirects to 人工授粉 but I don't think 授粉 is necessarily artificial.
Both 受粉 and 授粉 translate to "pollination" but the receiving/giving distinction is lost. What do we want to do?

@@ -7,0 +8,3 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>授粉</keb>
@@ -17,4 +20 @@
-<gloss>pollinization</gloss>
-<gloss>pollinisation</gloss>
-<gloss>fertilization</gloss>
-<gloss>fertilisation</gloss>
+<gloss>pollination</gloss>

乳白色	164601
乳白色の	95755

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<pos>&adj-no;</pos>

aligning with  2833400

simpler glosses
"lactescent" is just a fancy synonym of "milky"
"opal" used an adjective is not very common

@@ -12,3 +12,2 @@
-<gloss>milky white</gloss>
-<gloss>lactescent</gloss>
-<gloss>opal</gloss>
+<gloss>milk-white</gloss>
+<gloss>milky</gloss>

OK

We only use sk for rare variants. I'll split out むかか into a separate entry. It's in all the kokugos (and saito).
映日果 is in the kokugos. It should be visible.
Only koj and nikk have いちじゅく. Looks like 一熟 only applies to this reading. I think both can be dropped.

@@ -9,5 +9 @@
-<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
-</k_ele>
-<k_ele>
-<keb>一熟</keb>
-<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
+<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>
@@ -24,4 +19,0 @@
-<re_inf>&sk;</re_inf>
-</r_ele>
-<r_ele>
-<reb>いちじゅく</reb>

イチジク	225887	32.7%
無花果	83759	12.1%
映日果	458	0.1%
一熟	671	0.1%
いちじく	343402	49.7%
いちぢく	27699	4.0%
いちじゅく	240	0.0%
むかか	217	0.0%
イチヂク	9299	1.3%

I think this be simplified much further. 無花果/むかか is in Daijisen but I think it's too rare to bother keeping visible.

@@ -9 +9 @@
-<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
@@ -13,2 +13 @@
-<ke_inf>&ateji;</ke_inf>
-<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
@@ -18,15 +16,0 @@
-<re_restr>無花果</re_restr>
-<re_restr>映日果</re_restr>
-</r_ele>
-<r_ele>
-<reb>いちぢく</reb>
-<re_restr>無花果</re_restr>
-<re_restr>映日果</re_restr>
-<re_inf>&ik;</re_inf>
-</r_ele>
-<r_ele>
-<reb>いちじゅく</reb>
-</r_ele>
-<r_ele>
-<reb>むかか</reb>
-<re_restr>無花果</re_restr>
@@ -38,0 +23,12 @@
+<reb>いちぢく</reb>
+<re_inf>&sk;</re_inf>
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>いちじゅく</reb>
+<re_inf>&sk;</re_inf>
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>むかか</reb>
+<re_inf>&sk;</re_inf>
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
@@ -40,2 +36 @@
-<re_nokanji/>
-<re_inf>&ik;</re_inf>
+<re_inf>&sk;</re_inf>

無花果	83759
映日果	458
一熟	671
いちじく	343402
イチジク	225887

イチヂク	9299

@@ -8,0 +9 @@
+<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>
@@ -12,0 +14 @@
+<ke_inf>&rK;</ke_inf>

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."

@@ -12 +12,2 @@
-<gloss>interior of a forest or wood</gloss>
+<gloss>interior of a forest</gloss>
+<gloss>interior of a wood</gloss>

I'll add that but I think the other glosses should stay.

@@ -10,0 +11,7 @@
+<pos>&adv;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="1559290">連れる</xref>
+<gloss>bringing along</gloss>
+<gloss>accompanied by</gloss>
+<gloss>brought along</gloss>
+</sense>
+<sense>
@@ -12,0 +20 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2136050">につれ</xref>
@@ -15,6 +22,0 @@
-</sense>
-<sense>
-<pos>&adv;</pos>
-<xref type="see" seq="1559290">連れる</xref>
-<gloss>accompanied by</gloss>
-<gloss>brought along</gloss>

daijr, daijs

I would suggest changing it to 'bringing along' and making [2] into [1] as the 'proportion' meaning is a derivation of the 'bring along' meaning.

The tag could be changed into [conj], it is made from a conjunction and is marked as such by the daij's.

Reverso.

A bit misleading at the moment

@@ -15,0 +16,6 @@
+<sense>
+<pos>&adv;</pos>
+<xref type="see" seq="1559290">連れる</xref>
+<gloss>accompanied by</gloss>
+<gloss>brought along</gloss>
+</sense>

gg5

@@ -12,0 +13 @@
+<gloss>vascular bundle</gloss>

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<field>&bot;</field>

gg5

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<field>&bot;</field>

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーーーーーーー─┬────────┬───────╮
│ 愛想を尽かし　　 │ 19,282 │ 55.6% │
│ 愛想をつかし　　 │ 13,932 │ 40.1% │ - add
│ アイソを尽かし　 │    505 │  1.5% │ - add, sK
│ あいそを尽かし　 │     77 │  0.2% │
│ あいそをつかし　 │    698 │  2.0% │
│ アイソをつかし　 │    143 │  0.4% │
│ あいそうをつかし │     74 │  0.2% │
╰─ーーーーーーーー─┴────────┴───────╯

@@ -5,0 +6,7 @@
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>愛想をつかす</keb>
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>アイソを尽かす</keb>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>

@@ -12,0 +12,1 @@
+<pos>&v5s;</pos>

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

Entry created

GG5 and luminous only have "winter bud".

@@ -13,2 +13 @@
-<gloss>winter buds</gloss>
-<gloss>winter sprouts</gloss>
+<gloss>winter bud</gloss>

GG5

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<field>&bot;</field>

Entry created

Fork

GG5

@@ -14,0 +15 @@
+<field>&bot;</field>

Entry created

GG5

@@ -14,0 +15 @@
+<field>&bot;</field>

Entry created

GG5

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<field>&bot;</field>

Entry created

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".)

Sanokoku, meikyo, etc.

The anonymous edit below replaced 立たなぬ with 立たぬ.
I think one visible form is enough.

@@ -4,3 +3,0 @@
-<k_ele>
-<keb>火のないところに煙は立たぬ</keb>
-</k_ele>
@@ -11 +8,2 @@
-<keb>火の無いところに煙は立たぬ</keb>
+<keb>火のないところに煙は立たぬ</keb>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
@@ -14,0 +13,5 @@
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>
+</k_ele>
+<k_ele>
+<keb>火の無いところに煙は立たぬ</keb>
+<ke_inf>&sK;</ke_inf>

@@ -5 +5 @@
-<keb>火のないところに煙は立たなぬ</keb>
+<keb>火のないところに煙は立たぬ</keb>
@@ -8 +8 @@
-<keb>火のない所に煙は立たなぬ</keb>
+<keb>火のない所に煙は立たぬ</keb>
@@ -11 +11 @@
-<keb>火の無いところに煙は立たなぬ</keb>
+<keb>火の無いところに煙は立たぬ</keb>
@@ -14 +14 @@
-<keb>火の無い所に煙は立たなぬ</keb>
+<keb>火の無い所に煙は立たぬ</keb>
@@ -17 +17 @@
-<reb>ひのないところにけむりはたたなぬ</reb>
+<reb>ひのないところにけむりはたたぬ</reb>

daijs 
英語ことわざ教訓辞典

we already have ～立たない (which isn't in daijs)

Anyway, good that it is an entry now.

は婚式	20
の婚式	45
で婚式	21

Unidic has 婚式 tagged as a noun, and MeCab/Unidic parse passages containing X婚式 as X+婚式. I see a sentence in the Reverso collection "このような婚式はありません、どうして私にあなたに嫁ぐようにする？" It seems like it is getting some free-standing nounish use.

Not a noun.
I think this can be simplified. Looks like all the compounds are wedding anniversaries. 結婚式 is 結婚 + 式, not 婚 + 婚式.

@@ -11 +11 @@
-<pos>&n-suf;</pos>
+<pos>&suf;</pos>
@@ -13,3 +13 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="1243520">銀婚式</xref>
-<s_inf>esp. as 金婚式, 銀婚式, etc.</s_inf>
-<gloss>wedding (ceremony, anniversary)</gloss>
+<gloss>wedding (anniversary)</gloss>

Not sure we need both the note and xrefs.

Good entry to have. Despite unidic, all web hits I see are in compounds.

@@ -11 +10,0 @@
-<pos>&n;</pos>
@@ -12,0 +12,2 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="1242930">金婚式</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="1243520">銀婚式</xref>

RP: 【植】 パロベルデ《米国中西部･メキシコの砂漠に生えるとげのあるマメ科の低木》.
パロベルデ	105

Many of the WWW hits are for the パロベルデ国立公園 in Costa Rica.
Thanks, Ruby. Looking forward to more entries.

@@ -9 +9 @@
-<gloss>Blue Palo Verde (Parkinsonia florida)</gloss>
+<gloss>blue palo verde (Parkinsonia florida)</gloss>

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinsonia_florida
https://www.turbosquid.com/ja/3d-models/3d-parkinsonia-florida-blue-palo-verde-model-1923585

Hello this is the first entry I’ve ever made.  I’m a Japanese language learner from Arizona in the United States.  There are quite a lot of us learning Japanese here in the schools and using online dictionaries, so I wanted to start adding local things like flora and fauna to the dictionary to potentially help my classmates and other students from the region.  There aren’t many entries for local plants, animals, and food in the dictionaries that use jmdict.  There usually aren’t Japanese language Wikipedia entries either.

I don't think the x-ref is needed.

@@ -12,2 +11,0 @@
-<xref type="see" seq="2225420">総苞</xref>
-<xref type="see" seq="2225420">総苞</xref>

総苞片	7759

@@ -8 +8 @@
-<reb>そう</reb>
+<reb>そうほうへん</reb>
@@ -11,0 +12,3 @@
+<xref type="see" seq="2225420">総苞</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2225420">総苞</xref>
+<xref type="see" seq="2225420">総苞</xref>

gg5

@@ -12 +12,2 @@
-<gloss>?</gloss>
+<field>&bot;</field>
+<gloss>involucral scale</gloss>

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/ヤマボウシ

林縁	24018
Koj, Reverso

@@ -12 +12,2 @@
-<gloss>林の周縁部</gloss>
+<gloss>forest edge</gloss>
+<gloss>forest border</gloss>

daijr

LSD, etc.

@@ -8 +8 @@
-<reb>ー</reb>
+<reb>らくようこうようじゅ</reb>

gg5

gg5

MeCab/Unidic parses it as 淡黄+緑色 (たんこう+りょくしょく). I see GT says it's "あわ+おうりょくしょく".

A web search for the -おう- reading turns up lots of results, though. The -こう- reading doesn't return any.
We have both readings in our entry for 淡黄色, so maybe we should have both here.

https://yamasaki-zoen.com/gardening/gardening-202211.html
>> 緑がかった淡黄緑色（たんおうりょくしょく、淡いきみどりいろ）です。

https://kakuyomu.jp/works/1177354055182831632/episodes/16816452218623555266
>> 淡黄緑色（たんおうりょくしょく）の着流しに袖を通した。

http://urgell.blog62.fc2.com/blog-entry-57.html
>> 【きくぢん：淡黄緑色（たんおうりょくしょく）】

@@ -8,0 +9,3 @@
+</r_ele>
+<r_ele>
+<reb>たんおうりょくしょく</reb>

I don't know how reliable the furigana is in Meikyo 3e, but it has six entries that use this word and the furigana is たんこうりょくしょく in all of them.

@@ -8 +8 @@
-<reb>たんこう</reb>
+<reb>たんこうりょくしょく</reb>

reading

@@ -13 +13,2 @@
-<gloss>pistachio green</gloss>
+<xref type="see" seq="1182400">黄緑色</xref>
+<gloss>pistachio (green)</gloss>

Nikkoku (has 3 senses)
花付き	55310	57.5%
花つき	40892	42.5%

@@ -15 +15,2 @@
-<gloss>?</gloss>
+<gloss>flowering</gloss>
+<gloss>blooming</gloss>

gg5 daijr

gg5 daijr

gg5

daijs

https://dic.nicovideo.jp/a/ビジネスホテル
「ビジホ」と略される事が多い。

https://w.atwiki.jp/aniwotawiki/pages/39418.html
略してビジホ。

https://netyougo.com/2ch/4817.html
>> 2ch上にて使用されることが多い言葉。

Google N-gram Corpus Counts
╭─ーーーーー─┬────────┬───────╮
│ おにゃの子 │  2,165 │  8.6% │
│ オニャの子 │     42 │  0.2% │
│ おニャの子 │     41 │  0.2% │
│ おにゃのこ │ 21,574 │ 86.1% │
│ おにゃのコ │  1,235 │  4.9% │
╰─ーーーーー─┴────────┴───────╯

@@ -3,0 +4,3 @@
+<k_ele>
+<keb>おにゃの子</keb>
+</k_ele>
@@ -10,0 +14 @@
+<misc>&uk;</misc>

おにゃのこ	21574

https://slang2.com/words/おにゃのこ
女の子のことを可愛く呼んだ呼び方

https://netyougo.com/2ch/4817.html
「おにゃのこ」とは女の子を意味する言葉である。

https://nakarx.hatenablog.com/entry/20090426/1240741342
「おにゃのこ」＝「女の子」。

http://newjapanesech.blog.fc2.com/blog-entry-23.html
女の子を意味する言葉。「 女の子 」 → 「 おんなのこ 」 → 「 おにゃのこ 」

https://detail.chiebukuro.yahoo.co.jp/qa/question_detail/q14206881059
女の子を柔らかく呼び替えたものです。

See 2861971

I think the kokugos like to display old forms for words with 弁 since it's a simplified form for multiple kanji (辯, 辨, 瓣, 辦, 辮). And some words don't have an old form at all; 弁 is the original kanji for the word 武弁 according to meikyo, kanjipedia, etc.

花弁	399,907	  - also はなびら
花瓣	571

Split from 1194520.
瓣 is 旧字体 but it's in all the kokugos.

I don't think it needs a tag. We have 196 -税 entries and only two of them are tagged as [finc].

@@ -12 +11,0 @@
-<field>&finc;</field>
@@ -13,0 +13 @@
+<gloss>tax withheld at the source</gloss>

源泉税	17529
Reverso
https://airregi.jp/magazine/guide/7931/
https://www.zeiken.co.jp/kokusaizeimu/article/202406/KZ2024060260101.php

Not obvious.

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/イタリア王国

@@ -12 +12 @@
-<gloss>Regno d'Italia</gloss>
+<gloss>Kingdom of Italy (1861-1946)</gloss>

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/アサシン_クリードシリーズ
略称はAC、アサクリ。
https://www.gamespark.jp/article/2024/07/23/143471.html

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/牛栄子

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuka_8_Hours
>> The Suzuka 8 hours (鈴鹿8時間耐久ロードレース, Suzuka hachi-jikan taikyū rōdo rēsu, Suzuka 8 hours Endurance Road Race) is a motorcycle endurance race held at the Suzuka Circuit in Japan each year.

I assume this doesn't need [spec1]

@@ -1,3 +1,2 @@
-<ent_corp type="jmdict">jmdict</ent_corp>
-<ent_seq>2861988</ent_seq>
+<ent_corp type="jmnedict">jmnedict</ent_corp>
@@ -11 +10 @@
-<pos>&n;</pos>
+<misc>&ev;</misc>

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/鈴鹿8時間耐久ロードレース