Fake Festival In Britain [solved]

The article, which has intention to describe  5  shillings 1951 of the Great Britain is full of numerous and childish typos and lettering the photo.

As the result the Modification request 12163073 was created to correct all the nonsense.

Please ignore the right side of the image, it has nothing to do with the Numista site at all. The corrections are:

FieldGiven value

Obverse (head): Description with keywords (en)

Uncrowned portrait of king George VI left, legend above, denomination below.

Obverse (head): Lettering

GEORGIVS VI D:G:BR:OMN:REX F:D:
HP
FIVE SHILLINGS

Obverse (head): Unabridged legend

GEORGIVS VI DEI GRATIA BRITANNIARUM OMNIUM REX FIDEI DEFENSOR
Humphrey Paget
FIVE SHILLINGS

Obverse (head): Translation of the lettering (en)

GEORGE VI BY THE GRACE OF GOD KING OF ALL THE BRITAINS DEFENDER OF THE FAITH
Humphrey Paget
FIVE SHILLINGS

Reverse (back): Unabridged legend

1951 Benedetto Pistrucci

Reverse (back): Translation of the lettering (en)

[empty line, it is an absurd. “ B.P” can not be translated as “Benedetto Pistrucci,” someone decides to provoke the Crown in this way]

Edge: Description with keywords (en)

Incuse legend in Latin with dates 1851 1951 in Roman numbers.

Edge: Translation of the lettering (en)

MDCCCLI BY THE INDUSTRY OF ITS PEOPLE THE STATE FLOURISHES MCMLI

The result is 

Please ignore the right side of the image, it has nothing to do with the Numista site at all.

As we see the article not only describe the coin,  it disrespectfully substitute the vision of His Majesty on His money by own fantasies. At the moment the article dos not describe the coin, so 5 shillings 1951 KM#880 is missing in Numista catalog.

In which way the coin of 5 shillings 1951 may appear in the catalog?

Sorry I dont understand what is the request?

I became fluent of sorts over the years.

Benedetto Pistrucci was in translation field, not in Unabridged legend. Also Humphrey Paget was missing from obverse Unabridged legend.

Otherwise, referee rejected translations in uppercase, which is ok.

Conclusion:

If you disagree with a referee decision, please use Appeal button.

PS: If you want people to ignore right side of the image, then do not include it in your printscreen. You might not need to tell us then.

it seems that the modifications are still not done!

The translation of the unabridged text:

Obverse (head): Unabridged legend

GEORGIVS VI DEI GRATIA BRITANNIARUM OMNIUM REX FIDEI DEFENSOR
Humphrey Paget
FIVE SHILLINGS

can not be Translation: George the Sixth by the Grace of God King of all the Britains Defender of the Faith

As it was already given the translation is only:

GEORGE VI BY THE GRACE OF GOD KING OF ALL THE BRITAINS DEFENDER OF THE FAITH
Humphrey Paget
FIVE SHILLINGS

The same absurd with the edge of the famous coin.

Lettering: MDCCCLI CIVIUM INDUSTRIA FLORET CIVITAS MCMLI

has nothing to do with the imitation of translation:

Translation: 1851 By the industry of its people the state flourishes 1951

This absurd was not corrected. The modification request 12163073 already gave the only possible translation

Edge: Translation of the lettering (en)

MDCCCLI BY THE INDUSTRY OF ITS PEOPLE THE STATE FLOURISHES MCMLI

Numista community should repeat the first post:

"As we see the article not only describe the coin,  it disrespectfully substitute the vision of His Majesty on His money by own fantasies. At the moment the article does not describe the coin, so 5 shillings 1951 KM#880 is missing in Numista catalog.

In which way the coin of 5 shillings 1951 may appear in the catalog?"

It should be “King of all the Britons” not “King of all the Britainss (sic)”

OMN BRITT was inserted to mean those of British descent living all over the British Empire like New Zealand, Canada, South Africa, Australia etc. The term was a catch all for those people born in Britain, who are not living there now and anyone born overseas but of British decent.

The term OMN BRITT was finally removed in 1953, when the Empire became a Commonwealth, mainly as India was independent and he was only a King not an Emperor.