You’re welcome.
You may find this interesting as well: https://books.logos.com/#content=/books/2460&pageOffset=330
Remember it’s not the year that’s important (as this author seems to argue for a crucifixion year of AD 29), but the timing, a Friday Crucifixion and Sunday Resurrection, is perfectly believable from a Biblical standpoint.
In other words, the calendars I provided upthread can also be supported by the section of commentary of the author above (Trench, G. H. A study of St. John’s Gospel, to which are added: I. The Julian and Jewish calendars for A.D. 27-29. II. A diary of all the events in our Lord’s ministry which are mentioned in the Gospels. III. Tables showing how the fourth Gospel dovetails with the three synoptics. London: John Murray, 1918, pp 297-302)
As to the “three days/three nights” argument I again refer to the article by Jimmy Aikin I posted upthread to which you thanked me; while again not exhaustive on the matter, it’s sufficient to demonstrate there is little historical/traditional reason to take the expression literally. And without that, and with the positive evidence like that above, there is simply no reason to adhere to a “Wednesday Crucifixion”.
I hope you find this as fascinating as I; contrary to what some claim, the Church has indeed taken into account all Biblical OT mandates while still claiming a Friday Crucifixion (as the above example illustrates).
Thank you!