Question: When the "fig leaf" was removed, what was discovered about the figure below and to the right of St. Bartholomew in Michelango's "The Last Judgement"?
About the article "The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)", section "Restoration".

Candidate passages:
The fresco was restored along with the Sistine vault between 1980 and 1994 under the supervision of curator of the Vatican Museums Frabrizio Mancinelli.
The illustration reflects the restoration.
During the course of the restoration about half of the censorship of the "Fig-Leaf Campaign" was removed.
Numerous pieces of buried details, caught under the smoke and grime of scores of years were revealed after the restoration.
It was discovered that the fresco of Biagio de Cesena as Minos with donkey ears was being bitten in the genitalia by a coiled snake.
Another discovery is of the figure condemned to Hell directly below and to the right of St. Bartholomew with flayed skin.
It was, for centuries, considered to be male until removal of the "fig leaf" showed that it was female.
Some have hypothesized that Michelangelo depicted himself in the flayed skin of St. Bartholomew (see below) based on feelings of contempt Michelangelo may have had for being commissioned to paint "The Last Judgment."
Michelangelo often drew himself in a way where he had lost all his power and might.
He questioned over thoughts of dying and the Day of Judgement, which is seen as a reference to this work.
Michelangelo was in his late sixties when he finished this painting, and it has been argued that the peeling of Bartholomew signifies the peeling of the flesh awaiting a new rebirth.
The bearded figure of St. Bartholomew holding the skin was theorized to depict the satirist and erotic writer Pietro Aretino, who had tried to extort a valuable drawing from Michelangelo; this theory has been conclusively refuted because the conflict between Michelangelo and zed Aretino did not occur until 1545, seven years after the fresco's completion. 
Conjunction and disjunction terms reversed on pages 59–67Page 350 indicates a footnote 8 that does not show up on page 352: the indication probably should be footnote 7.
The page swap problem from the first edition now occurs on pages 302-303 of the second edition.p.
302: "above are" should be directly followed by "retained... on the bottom of page 302.
Then on page 303: We recall a linkage relation is of the form" should be followed by equation 5.29 and what follows until the bottom of page 302, when "If we do this" is followed by equation 5.30; then the book is back in order.
The table of contents does not list early material, such as the prefaces.
Chapter 8 is by Kineman, not Rosen: this is not indicated in the table of contents.p.
72 references to the diagram below refer to the diagram above.p.
91 "In effect, then, he thus produced a diagram of the form which should be compared to Figure 2.4.." should be: "In effect, then, he thus produced a diagram of the form shown in Figure 3.1 which should be compared to Figure 2.4.."p. 96 "Fig 3.2 below:" should be "Fig 3.2 below."p.
104 "Fig.
3.5" should be "Fig.
3.5."p.
109 "Fig.
3.8 below:" should be "Fig.
3.8 above."p.
126 "Fig 3.10 below" should be "Fig 3.10 above"p. 175 "Fig 3.15 below;" should be "Fig 3.15 above."p.
176 "Fig 3.16 below:" should be "Fig 3.16 above."p.
247 "Fig 4.1 below:" should be "Fig 4.1 above."p.
273 "Fig 5.1 below:" should be "Fig 5.1 above."p.
332 "Fig 6.2 below:" should be "Fig 6.2 above."p.
333 "Fig 6.3 below:" should be "Fig 6.3 above."p.
334 "Fig 6.4 below:" should be "Fig 6.4 above."p.
341 "Fig 6.6 below:" should be "Fig 6.6 above."p.
352 "Fig 6.8 below:" should be "Fig 6.8 above.
"The back blurb incorrectly references Ontology of Anticipation by Kinemen: the chapter title is Relational Science: Towards a Unified Theory of Nature. 
The present Church of England parish church of Saint Bartholomew is a Gothic Revival building designed by J Picton and built in 1863.
The new building replaces an older St Bartholomew's church that had been built in the 13th century and altered probably early in the 18th century.
When the new church was consecrated the roof of the old one was removed and later layers of plaster stripped from the interior walls, revealing Medieval wall paintings of ""figure subjects and geometrical and masonry patterns"" that ""covered the walls"".
These have now been lost and the church ruins have greatly deteriorated.
The army garrison (below) has its own garrison church, a 20th-century building dedicated to Saint Eligius. 
Figs have an obligate mutualism with fig wasps, (Agaonidae); figs are pollinated only by fig wasps, and fig wasps can reproduce only in fig flowers.
Generally, each fig species depends on a single species of wasp for pollination.
The wasps are similarly dependent on their fig species to reproduce.
"F. pleurocarpa" is pollinated by two species of fig wasp—"Pleistodontes regalis" and "P. deuterus".
This is one of the few cases where more than one species of fig wasp has been raised from the same syconium.
The assumption that fig species are usually pollinated by just one species of fig wasp has been challenged by the discovery of cryptic species complexes among what was thought previously to be single species of fig wasps.