Case Studies in Politics and Crime == 

 First of all, that's a misleading title - what that section used to be was a summary of the old Anti-Freemasonry page.  Second of all, that section is by no means a case study.  I would suggest you choose a more appropriate and less leading title.  The 1799 material should be in a history section, or somewhere else, as it makes no sense where it is now - the section doesn't read properly.  The ritual wasn't antiquated when it was originally published, and I fail to see what relevance it has to the situation with Pitt - Pitt was the British Prime Minister in 1799, and Duncan's Monitor wasn't published until the late 1800s in the US. 

 Masonic charity has nothing to do with religious opposition (as a matter of fact, that is one of the things that the Catholics felt was good about Masonry), the 1980s date for ritual change is wrong if it's not cited, as I believe it was actually the 1970s, but one would have to ask UGLE about it.  Also, why is the forget-me-not section now called "In Remembrance" and part of the Politics and Crime section? 

 In short, I need a really good reason as to why that whole thing should not be reverted, because it makes no sense whatsoever now in terms of either readability or organization.  The titles have almost nothing to do with the content, and make very little sense themselves.   

 :I placed the reference to Duncan's in the rituals section and it was removed. I welcome you to reinsert it there as a symbol of WP:AGF.  -   

 ==