Wikipedia:Peer review/Book of Common Prayer (Unitarian)/archive1

Book of Common Prayer (Unitarian)

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to launch an FAC for this article in the next month or so. I've had a couple editors provide informal commentary over the last few months since the successful GAN, but I have yet to go to FAC and would like to walk in knowing a bit more than I do now.

Thanks, ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

ThadeusOfNazereth

I will have some time this weekend to leave comments on this article! ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 12:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Clarifying that I will most likely to get to making comments on Christmas Eve :) ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:04, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

@Pbritti: Merry Christmas - Comments have been left! I am nowhere near an expert in this area but hopefully this gives you a decent roadmap for further revisions :). Let me know if there are other specific things you want me to look at. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 00:44, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Brilliant, @ThadeusOfNazereth: I can't wait to work through this! ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:21, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

History

• legally mandated liturgy, 1662 Book of Common Prayer -> insert "the" before 1662.
• "shorten and unify the service" -> If this is an exact quote there should probably be a citation with the exact page number at the end of this sentence.
• over a third of all English Dissenters liturgies -> "all English Dissenters' liturgies"
• Clarke was a friend of Caroline -> Since it's the first mention of her, full name or title for Caroline?
• Freeman—Harvard graduate and Congregationalist—was invited to serve as a lay reader at King's Chapel in 1782 -> "Freeman—a Harvard graduate and Congregationalist"
• Freeman agitated for a revised prayer book -> Not a massive issue but I don't think "agitated" is super common in this context - Is there a different word you can use?
• Despite this, there was dissent and controversy over the liturgy's publication. -> Examples? Nature of the dissent? Were there specific notable people who were displeased by this?
• humanist- and non-Christian-inspired -> I think the dash after "humanist" is unnecessary
• Is this book used outside of King's Chapel at all? Is it approved for use in other UUA churches?

The answer to this question is no, not officially. They are available for private, individual purchase, though. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:53, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Contents

• Are the notes about the title pages + original printers of the different books necessary? If they're the norm in other articles it's probably fine but those notes felt a bit like trivia to me.
• towards to end of his life -> "towards the end of his life"
• Though not formally published, an "eighth edition" developed between 1955 and 1965 under minister Joseph Barth through the introduction of additional services such as the imposition of ashes on Ash Wednesday -> I think the phrasing "through the introduction" is out of place - Maybe "introduced additional services"?

PanagiotisZois

This article seems pretty interesting, so if you don't mind keeping this peer review open, I would like to go through the article and leave some comments within the next few days. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 14:34, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@PanagiotisZois: That would be lovely! I recently finally got around to opening a book that I got quite a while ago, Paul V. Marshall's One, Catholic, and Apostolic (2004), and in anticipation of your review, I've made a handful of alterations/additions using this very handy volume. I have also tried to reduce reliance on sources that predate 1900 by using Marshall. Your review is greatly appreciated. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:12, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

• One first thing before I move forward. Granted, this is only a suggestion but I think the "History" section is a bit too big. Nothing needs to be taken out, but I believe the section would benefit from being split in two. The first 6 paragraphs making up "History in the United Kingdom", while the "Freeman and the King's Chapel liturgy" becomes "History in the United States". Alternatively, splitting that first 6 paragraphs into 2 separate subsections would also work; one titled "Samuel Clarke", and the other "Theophilus Lindsey". --PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:25, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
  • I agree. If you find material worthy of removal for the sake of brevity or focus, let me know! ~ Pbritti (talk) 20:40, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Freeman and the King's Chapel liturgy

Apologies for taking 10 days to move further down. I had a few things of my own to take care of. Really interesting read thus far. My comments for this section. --PanagiotisZois (talk) 16:31, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

1. "James Freeman of King's Chapel". Was Freeman just a member? How is he associated with the Chapel?
2. "King's Chapel's Loyalist Anglican minister" may need to be rewritten, as you have a few too many adjectives; minister is Anglica, and Loyalist, and of King's Chapel. Also, is his name mentioned in the sources?
3. "Those Anglicans who" can simply become "The Anglicas" or just "Anglicans".
4. "content using" to "content with using"
5. Is Trinity Church the Trinity Church (Boston)? If yes, it should be linked.
6. "King's Chapel had ceased praying the 1662 prayer book's prescribed prayer for the king and royal family" probably needs to be reworded slightly, as the word "prayer" appears three times in close proximity. Would replacing "praying" with "using" work? Also, the word "already" should probably go after "had".
7. "would resign his position" to "would resign from his position"
8. Maybe it's unnecessary, but at "The congregation decided", does it mean that King's Chapel's congregation decided?

Excellent comments, PanagiotisZois! Once I have time at the end of the week, I'll be working through these. Thank you! ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)