Inappropriate information in Czech 20 haleru 1993-2003

It is a note about article

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces2151.html

This article was composed by Jarcek, for he signed it. It looks at least strange, that the person, who declares that he takes so much care about readers in English language does not permit them at all to read the denomination of the coin!

In English the denomination is '20 haleru', this phrase consists of symbols of English alphabet and Arabic numerals, used in English language. There is no place for any speculations about the term. Just accept it.

More over the varieties that are well known and widely published for many years, Jarcek announced personal discovery in 2016. At least it is very strange not to mention Jaroslav Moravec. České mince 1993–2001 a medaile České mincovny 1993–2001 who many many many years ago on page 17 described the edge differences in proper and scientific way and proved that they are varieties. Of course all varieties 1994 and 1996 already have their order in description. And the catalog should follow it. It is at least strange, why the variety that is described in the first place everywhere, just without any reason becomes the second? Or it is a weak attempt to hide the fact, that the data are already in scientific circulation?

It seems that it is required the correction of the data and information resources, as well as the re-arranging of the varieties.

It is an article of the Catalog and not a personal note, respect readers and respect the Catalog.

Name is abundant issue, especially after Xavier made modification on search, so we can now search for 20 Haleru and we get the right results:

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/index.php?r=20+haleru&c=&co=y&cno=y&cc=y&cn=y&cj=y&ce=y&cu=y&cat=y&mode=simplifie&p=1&e=&d=&ca=3&no=&i=&v=&m=&a=&t=&dg=&w=&g=&f=

Coin sheet is quite older than my presence on Numista, so I did not composed it.

What this should mean, I have no idea:
More over the varieties that are well known and widely published for many years, Jarcek announced personal discovery in 2016. At least it is very strange not to mention Jaroslav Moravec. České mince 1993–2001 a medaile České mincovny 1993–2001 who many many many years ago on page 17 described the edge differences in proper and scientific way and proved that they are varieties. Of course all varieties 1994 and 1996 already have their order in description. And the catalog should follow it. It is at least strange, why the variety that is described in the first place everywhere, just without any reason becomes the second? Or it is a weak attempt to hide the fact, that the data are already in scientific circulation?

I have not announced any personal discovery, where have you been on that? I only supplied some translations to Sjoelund, who made these nice drawings of those variations.

And year lines are automatically aranged alphabetically by comments, so if some variants changed places, I cannot really do anything without it.

So again.

What is wrong? Is there some variety missing? Is wrongly mentioned? I guess not, Sjoelund dedicated several years to databasing varieties and I supplied him with every source I found on the issue, including from book from Jaroslav Moravec. All known varieties are listed as far as I know.