Interesting discussion
I think it's too subjective and a matter of personal taste. I recently saw a Ludovisi collection of ancient Roman statues. 90% of those have replaced heads and other extremities, some are as new as late 19th, early 20th C. some paintings were re-touched and damaged/missed parts re-painted. Some do not even mention this in their descriptions. Noone would even dare to call them fakes, regardless of how they're named. They were properly and professionally restored, and it does not matter if the dealer sold them as completely genuine, it does not make a restored item a fake regardless of price or disclosure, these pieces are NOT fakes by any mean. So why would one call properly restored sword a fake? If such, most of us collect fake swords as most were restored at one point of time or another, whether 100, 20 or 2 years ago... just saying