I would however like to see it restored, or rebuilt, to the way everyone remembers it. If that means that its not entirely accurate, then so be it.
I emphatically disagree. Museums should be about preserving the past accurately, not pandering to people's preconceptions about it. The truth is not a popularity contest. A restoration should be based on the most scientific reconstruction possible. If that goes against people's expectations, then that's a good thing. That's what museums are for -- to teach us things we didn't know, and to replace beliefs and assumptions with solid evidence.
Which is not indicative of what it looked like in the 1960s, because it was after a prior restoration done without accurate reference.
Like I said, we should stop wasting energy rehashing the old debates and apply some real experimentation to this. Let's try to find someone who can build replica miniatures with various levels of detail and figure out which one best matches the original photos when shot under equivalent conditions. Science is better than rhetoric.