Organization Issue Vis a Vis "Origins" Section 

There is an organizational problem here.  Right up near the front is a section entitled "Origins according to the LDS Church", but immediately following this section is no corresponding section entitled "Origins according to Historians" or "Other Origin Accounts" or some such title where critical views of the Church's account can be placed.  Indeed, critical views of the origins story are relegated deep within the article as a single sentence, while the Church's story is accorded several paragraphs.  I suggest condensing the "Origins" section and renaming it.  The section should contain a single paragraph (no more than three or four sentences) describing the Church's origin story.  Then there should be a second section of equal length (or so) detailing the principal critical views against the Church's origin story.  As it stands, there is only the Church-sponsored view of the Book's origin and no others.  (  )