The article
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces3548.html
has the Obverse description:
Portrait of Susan B Anthony, a pioneer for women's rights. This dollar coin was badly accepted and withdrawn. It was minted again in 1999. [...]
There are questions about it.
1. The part
This dollar coin was badly accepted and withdrawn. It was minted again in 1999.
looks like a remark and not the description. Most probably it should be in the 'Comment' section.
2. The remark itself is very strange. This August I saw in and got from circulation many of Susan B Anthony Dollars. In which way the reality corresponds to the statement 'withdrawn'?
May it worth to write instead of
This dollar coin was badly accepted and withdrawn. It was minted again in 1999.
something like that
This dollar coin was badly accepted. It was minted again in 1999.
Anyway, everywhere in the country all dollar pieces are badly accepted. Population prefers one dollar bills. Still there is a question about 'minted again'. The catalog reflects this fact, why it should be mentioned? If the population does not like 1 dollar pieces, the situation was like this in 1990 already, then maybe it is good to describe the reasons (such as wending machines), why the Authorities issued the coin again in addition to the bare statement 'It was minted again in 1999.'?