5 New Pence - Elizabeth II 2nd portrait to correct lettering

The article
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces6524.html

consists of complete contradictions and misleads reader.

The obverse has photo with lettering
ELIZABETH THE SECOND
PM
· 1975 ·

Right now the lettering is far far away from reality:
ELIZABETH THE SECOND
· 1971 ·


The Numista law for referees states:
"
When a picture is available, type the displayed date and mint letter. Otherwise, type a possible date and letter. Do not type generic text like "date".

Include the small letterings like the engraver name and motto on the coats of arm.
"
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/contributions/instructions.php

Direct modification requests https://en.numista.com/catalogue/contributions/voir_demande.php?id=3451192



returns the rejection of a referee with unclear comment:
Please harass someone else.

First of all this is technical issue: the article should be returned to the standard Numista form. It is not clear, why the referee decided to insult the supplier of the request. Anyway the referee still has opportunity to excuse for such completely inappropriate behavior.

Second, in which way the article can be corrected with correct lettering of the photo

ELIZABETH THE SECOND
PM
· 1975 ·

without permitting the referee in question to spoil the article in future?

Good evening,

Despite this post has not been yet reported, I seize the opportunity to remind several points:

• Courtesy is the standard. It might be that the initial request has been experienced as some kinf of harassment, because of the wording of that request:
  
• temperance and moderation are usefull: "consists of complete contradictions and misleads reader" is quite disproportionate when it points out that the engraver's initials are missing.
  

I lock this post.