Talk:Scottish Prayer Book (1637)

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 Edge3 (talk) 01:28, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that because of violent reactions to a Scottish prayer book, like that of Jenny Geddes on 23 July 1637 (pictured), Walter Whitford kept loaded pistols visible to his congregants while using the text? Source: Jacobs, Alan (2013). The Book of Common Prayer: A Biography. Lives of Great Religious Books. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-15481-7. Page 73.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Yan'an Road Medium Capacity Bus Transit System
  • Comment: If possible, please run this DYK on 23 July to commemorate the anniversary of both the prayer book's introduction and Gedde's protest. I am currently hoping to expand this page using the sources currently present in the article; the progress to this end can be found at User:Pbritti/sandbox/Scottish Prayer Book (1637).

Created by Pbritti (talk). Self-nominated at 21:14, 27 June 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Scottish Prayer Book (1637); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

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

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing:
• Neutral
  :
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed : Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: (1) All sources for the hook are to hard-copy texts that I could not check, but texts are reputable; looks reasonable, but could not check for close paraphrasing, etc; AGF. (2) Article has some typos that need fixing, particularly in the section that is the basis for the hook: (a) "On Sunday, 23 July 1637, The new prayer book" - improper capitalisation; (b) "celebrated according to the new prayer book with two loaded pistols on the desk" - celebrated what? the eucharist? (c) I assume that Bishop of Brechin displayed the pistols at a later celebration, after Geddes' protest? if so, that should be made clear, since this is the basis for the hook; (d) note 30 - I think that should be "Procter and Maclear", not "Maclean"? (e) there is a reference to "Charles III" in the section headed "Savoy and the 1662 prayer book"; should be "Charles II"? (f) typo in very first line of article: "an version"; (g) second sentence in lead paragraph beginning "A text sharing..." is very convoluted, especially for the lead paragraph; could be broken into a couple of sentences. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:45, 15 July 2023 (UTC) Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:45, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• • @Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: Thanks for making this your first review! I'll work through your comments in the next hourish, so if you're still on-Wiki later today and have a moment, please check back! ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:00, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: (a) Fixed. (b) Source does not specify the type of service (it could have been a Holy Communion or Morning Prayer), but does note that the bishop "read his first service from the prayer book" with the pistols. I have modified the text to this effect. (c) Your assumption is correct and supported by the source. I have modified the text to this effect. (d) Whoops, that's embarrassing. Fixed. (e) Must've had the news on. Fixed. (f) Fixed. (g) I have rewritten that sentence and broken it in two (there are two different ideas, you're right). Great feedback; please let me know if you see anything else. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:42, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Looks good. Glad you found the comments helpful. I don't have any additional comments, but would appreciate a more experienced reviewer taking a look. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 16:54, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: If you're concerned, promoters generally at least skim reviews before approval, so you have some latitude to approve even when you aren't super confident in your decision. However, if you are so unsure that you want another reviewer anyway, please use the DYK?again subst template again. Thanks for you suggested changes! ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:03, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks, I'm content to leave it to the promotion stage. Enjoyed reading the article Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 17:07, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for doing that. I find these templates very confusing and missed that step. I am not techno-proficient. "I am Mr Serjeant Buzfuz and I approve this tick mark."Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 17:26, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pbritti: Hi! I have just a few comments. The image's caption in the article states, "According to folklore...", but the hook presents the incident as fact. Since the story has not been corroborated with definitive evidence (as stated in the Jenny Geddes article), I would suggest modifying the hook and the article accordingly. For example, in the article, you could modify "As the Communion office was being celebrated, Geddes threw a stool at him..." to state that "Geddes allegedly threw a stool at him".

Also, I suggest rephrasing the hook to avoid a dangling modifier. The clause "like that of Jenny Geddes on 23 July 1637" appears to modify "Scottish prayer book", though you intend to modify "violent reactions". Edge3 (talk) 21:59, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Edge3: I am fairly certain the Jenny Geddes article is behind on recent scholarship. While it was vogue for many Victorian Anglo-Catholics to question the veracity of the Geddes story, such as in Leighton Pullan's The History of the Book of Common Prayer (1901, Pg. 279), the modern consensus trends towards asserting that the riot is a historic fact and that Geddes's action is instead "probably the only episode in Prayer Book history that has won a place in popular folklore" (Charles Hefling, "Scotland: Episcopalians and Nonjurors" in The Oxford Guide to The Book of Common Prayer, 2006, Pg. 168). The same story is repeated consistently across many academic sources (I chose Jacobs 2013 as the most concise account). Some other sources such as Duncan B. Forester in The Oxford History of Christian Worship (2006, Pg. 478), Bryan D. Spinks in the same (Pg. 509), and Leonie James in 'This Great Firebrand' (2017, Pg. 114–115) testify exclusively to the riot at St Giles'; of course, Spinks also recalls Geddes's story entering folklore for typifying the opposition to the prayer book in his The Rise and Fall of the Incomparable Liturgy (2017, Pg. 73) and in a chapter of Oxford Guide (Pg. 50–51).

In short, the conception that Geddes's was mythical is a historic one that is not generally repeated today. Instead, academics note that her involvement in the riot was instead immortalized in the public memory for its usefulness as a contemporary political talking point where the common Scottish faithful were resisting English clerical imposition. I've added some language the article to avoid making a definitive statement on veracity in wikivoice, but I think a survey of the sources suggests it's unnecessary.

As for the dangling modifier, I agree. See the below ALT1:

ALT1: ... that because of violent reactions–such as Jenny Geddes's on 23 July 1637 (pictured)–to a Scottish prayer book, Walter Whitford kept loaded pistols visible to his congregants while using the text?

Let me know if you have any further suggestions or questions. ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:25, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pbritti: Thanks for the detailed response! In the article, would you still want the image caption to begin with "According to folklore..."? If the sources regard the incident as real, then you don't need to characterize it as folklore. Also, the image caption still states that Geddes threw the stool "at a bishop", while note 6 indicates a disagreement in the literature as to whether the celebrant was the Dean or Bishop of Edinburgh. The Jenny Geddes article states that the victim of her throw was the Dean, consistent with the article for James Hannay (minister). Edge3 (talk) 02:57, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Edge3: First off: thank you for your interest in improving the article and asking questions when something felt off. Seriously, by challenging me a bit, you've given me a second wind during a week when I was getting a bit burnt out. As to your comment: the way you read that caption is not how I wanted it to read. That's the failure of the writer, not the reader; I have made the change. Also, I'm sitting with seven books in front of me with nine accounts between them. Only Procter & Maclear–a history modified for grade-school use around the turn of the last century–recounts the target of the stool as the dean. Four other histories dating to post-2000 all agree it was the bishop (as do the earliest contemporary records). I think Procter & Maclear are just wrong here; I have expunged that detail from the note. ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:07, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Pbritti: My pleasure! This is a fun DYK to review, especially with the differences across articles that piqued my curiosity. It looks like Jenny Geddes and James Hannay (minister) will have to be updated, but that's not our concern for the purposes of this nomination. Would you like to add a link to David Lindsay (bishop of Edinburgh) within the article? Of course, only as long as the sources explicitly mention him by name. Also, just to confirm, do the sources identify Geddes as a "vegetable-seller"? Edge3 (talk) 03:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Edge3: No source mentions him by name (which is very frustrating!). I agree on the need to improve both those articles. I've decided I'll do Geddes first. I need to build out the prayer book article more in the coming months, too, as the text saw something of an unusual afterlife due to the Nonjuring schism. ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:41, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Frustrating, indeed! Do you have a source for labeling Geddes as a "vegetable-seller" in the article's image caption? Edge3 (talk) 03:58, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's referenced to Hefling, Pg. 168. "[...] one Jenny Geddes, a vegetable-seller, who let the bishop of Edinburgh know what she thought of his prayers [...]" ~ Pbritti (talk) 04:03, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I asked because Jenny Geddes uses the terms "market-trader", "market-woman", and "street-seller" to describe her occupation. Your sourcing is fine and helps clear things up for me. I'll promote this for July 23. Just a reminder that we're currently rotating DYKs every 12 hours. Do you prefer running this in the morning or afternoon? The schedule with timestamps is at Template:Did you know/Queue, and it looks like I'll have to wait for Preps 4 or 5 to clear. Edge3 (talk) 04:17, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dealer's choice. I would prefer the Scottish audience get a chance to see a hook that pertains to their history, but I don't know what's best for that. Thank you! :) ~ Pbritti (talk) 04:20, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to run it in the afternoon! More precisely, that's 13:00 BST. The 23rd falls on a Sunday this year. If the Scots are anything like me, they're browsing Wikipedia later in the day rather than the wee hours of a Sunday morning. 😋 Edge3 (talk) 04:43, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]