In the churches I've been in we have people of both positions accepting each other and sharing details. I've looked into those details but I find that they primarily come from difficulty understanding the Bible's wide use of inclusive counting, and difficulty understanding the Bible's use of the first day of the week as a Mosaic type. Then the whole interpretation is constructed around those difficulties as if it doesn't create more problems.

Some samples, just picking from your chart: (1) No blood moon in 31, but there was one in 33 via lunar eclipse (Acts 2:16-21); (2) No typological 10 Nisan entry represented by the inspection of the lamb because 10 Nisan would be on Sabbath, not a journeying day (Ex. 12:3); (3) No evidence that "preparation" was a term for a day before an annual rest day, because there was no food prep on such days but only before Sabbath (Ex. 16:5); (4) The holy convocation of 15 Nisan is not called "Sabbath" or "Sabbatical" anywhere, only "miqra" (assembly, Lev. 23:7); (5) Modern translations select the past rather than the perfect to translate the aorist in Mark 16:1, while KJV uses perfect tense to indicate the reading compatible with the 6th-day crucifixion and all other verses: "When the sabbath was past, [they] had bought sweet spices", i.e., at the end of Sabbath they had already bought them.

That brings us to the many lines of argument that "three days and three nights" is not to be taken as it reads in literal English. First, in literal English it is incompatible with the more-frequent phrase "on the third day"; the position ignores all these and their similarities. Second, David also uses "on the third day" interchangeably with "three days agone" and "three days and three nights", 1 Sam. 30:1, 12-13. Third, several narratives demonstrate that a three-day cycle was a common narrative framing and "third day" was synonymous with what we call "day after tomorrow". Fourth, this agrees with every other evidence of inclusive counting demonstrated in the Bible and Near East literature generically. I have several more points in the files.

So if one is willing to respect all the texts I believe one is gradually weaned of the Wednesday theory. I took time to consider it and on occasions favored it a bit, but I realized it introduces far more inconsistencies than it resolves. Thanks for listening!