Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
You think that it is the only warbird that has errors? The important thing is that people get to see a 109. Most people won't know the difference, but they get too see a historic airplane. Yes, there will be people who do know the difference, but I would prefer that people at least get to see one with errors than to not see it at all.
True! But again this is not even a historic plane, but only (in the best, if ever!) the image of ww2 fighter. Only the wings are original. They are not even colored according to the original. As I said earlier like that it is "a theme park artifact".
With today's knowledge, even a theme park should be more then just "roughly near" the original. There are enough bad examples over the world and (IMO) we don't need one more. Quality and historical correctness should be a point you can expect and demand, even and especially if you are not the (Me 109) buff. There are also losts of very good rebuilds (Fw 190 A-8 in Hannover-Laatzen >a rebuild from six! wrecks<, Me 110 F-2 in Berlin etc.) and all took the nessecary research time to give it a correct appearance. Why not here? I cannot agree on your last sentence. It should be: what ever it is, it should be correct or atleast as close as it can be researched to the original. The labor to make it correct is the same as just the idea of a plane. As always it's a matter of good research and planning that makes a good job. And, sorry again!, but with you're last sentence you do not appreciate all the succesful works done over last past years (Fw 190 D-13, yellow 10/ He 219 A-2/ Fw 190 A-8, red 6/ rom. Ju 88 D-1/ Me 109 G-4 / Me 109 G-10, black 10...).