I do not know how you have seen the reference. It plainly shows the sentence: "Nat knew time would never fade his anger at what his father had done:"
Webster says that fade in its transitive form means: "cause something to fade" and it has not placed any constraints on the objects it can take.
"All in all, using this sentence:
*nothing could fade his anger*
in everyday conversations is vague and incorrect."
Who told that it is correct in everyday conversations? I? I just told that it is correct; I did not tell where it can be used, yet on the contrary, you firstly said that:
"As for 'fade', although it is defined as both a transitive and an intransitive verb in dictionaries, in the case of the sentence under question, it cannot be used as a transitive verb. It is incorrect to say:
*nothing could fade his anger*."
You told that it is incorrect at all. I am not ruling out that this is not used in everyday conversations, nonetheless. I'll put these two new references about "fade his smile," somehow different from "fade his anger:"
http://www.legacy.com/guestbook/dignitymemorial/guestbook.aspx?n=eric-rodriguez&pid=177387641&view=2&entry=105354796
http://news.sky.com/story/alis-final-year-family-photos-of-boxing-legend-10304226
Incidentally, thank you very much for your congratulation.