" 
 ::I explained to you quite clearly what the problems were on your talkpage.  Look at it this way:  ""Wikipedia insists you rewrite"", or ""Wikipedia requires you rewrite.""  Which sounds more neutral?  That tone is a persistent issue in the article.   
 ::Second, a series of blockquotes is not appropriate, especially when the writer is aiming at a particular audience that this article does not.  What ""most American Masons might be surprised to know"" has no bearing when your audience is anyone worldwide who wants to read the article.  
 ::Finally, why are you taking an informational issue as an institutional bias issue?  It does let you conveniently sidestep the fact that you made a mistake, because it allows you to blame others instead of fixing the issue, but unfortunately for you in this case,  I personally don't care that you exist - you can basically do whatever you want in your own jurisdiction as I do in mine, and we can all go on our merry way.  The issue at hand is that you're not going to write an article is such a way where you show you're ""right"" and everyone else is ""wrong"" by synthesizing and editorializing what sources actually say.  An encyclopedia is not a newspaper; we do not exist to sway opinions, but to convey facts in a neutral fashion.   "