Talk:Book of Common Prayer (1928, United States)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk) 01:55, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

( Comment or view )

( Article history links:

• Book of Common Prayer (1928, United States)
• Book of Common Prayer (1928, England)

)

• ... that the 1928 Book of Common Prayer was adopted by the Episcopal Church in the United States, but the Church of England's 1928 Book of Common Prayer was rejected by parliament? Source: Parsons, Edward Lambe; Jones, Bayard Hale (1937). The American Prayer Book: Its Origins and Principles. New York City: Charles Scribner's Sons. p. 61-62.; Cummings, Brian (2011). The Book of the Common Prayer: The Text of 1549, 1559, 1662. Oxford World's Classics (2013 ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. xlvii.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Nintendo of America, Inc. v. Blockbuster Entertainment Corp., Template:Did you know nominations/Flight Deck (California's Great America).
  • Comment: The article Book of Common Prayer (1928, England) has been expanded well beyond the five-fold requirement. However, I intend to do some more expansion with it. Apologies for any instability that causes. Both QPQs to come.

Created by Pbritti (talk). Self-nominated at 17:47, 31 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Book of Common Prayer (1928, United States); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image eligibility:

• Freely licensed: - na
• Used in article: - NA
• Clear at 100px: - NA

QPQ: - Not done
Overall: Needs QPQ HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 03:28, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

@HickoryOughtShirt?4: just finished the QPQs. Thanks for the review! ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:54, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Pbritti, Thanks for writing an interesting article! HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 20:24, 3 April 2023 (UTC)