I fixed it, or at least added a caption clarifying the restrike (which was noted in the image details but not the article itself).
"Fix it" is the correct response. Wikipedia has issues, but this is the only way it can possibly get better.
Edit to add: I also took out the line about "rare examples in excellent condition". There was no cited reference for that statement, and it doesn't jibe with PCGS population data anyway.
Edited by Alpha2814
01/07/2019 5:38 pm