moderation of submission edits and deletions

This submission deletion request:https://contribute.imdb.com/contribution/230507-072733-786000/?ref_=ra_his_wa

the original submission states that a CH-53 Super Stallion has a Low mounted Tail Rotor.   That is absolutely false. The CH-53 is the exact helicopter you see in the movie Sum of All Fears, when the bomb goes off and the Marines rescue the President. 

Does this look like a Low mounted tail rotor to you?  No, it is a HIGH Mounted Tail Rotor and at its lowest point, stands about 4 feet above your average height adult human of 6 foot 2.



That tail rotor was specifically designed like that not only so that infantry can load and unload in a hot environment without the risk of being struck by the rotor blades,  the CH-53 can also hot load and unload small utility vehicles while the helicopter is still running and turning rotors.

Why was that submission declined to remove that incorrect original submission?   it contained 100% Factual information for reasons to delete.

IMHO:  going to be quite honest here,  IMDB needs some people who are technically fluent in topics like this.  because I have had more submissions and edit/deletions denied because reviewers and moderators simply do not have the technical knowledge or quite simply, the ability to run a simple search and see what took me 3 seconds to find a image confirming that the CH-53 does in-fact have a high mounted tail rotor which validates my deletion request.   and this happens WAAAAAY more often than should be happening for a place like IMDB with its presence.    If factual information is going to be denied, whats the point of even having the ability to correct someone who posted false information and then the corrected information is declined because of:

"Reason Unable to verify.

Your contribution has been declined.We have been unable to verify your contribution. Unfortunately we were unable to accept your submission as we were unable to verify the information provided."

^ ^ That image above, is your verification. what is so hard about that?