Talk:Bishopsbourne Paddock

Article title

Blue Square Thing. An unreliable statistical database says the ground was called "Bourne Paddock", and you accepted that as fact, without hesitation. There is no doubt that the historic name, in use when Mann staged his matches there, was Bishopsbourne Paddock. That is confirmed by Haygarth, Ashley-Cooper, Bowen, Maun, Altham, Underdown, and even by the University of Cambridge. I suspect that CricketArchive, in its inimitable way, has got its wires completely crossed between Bishopsbourne (the village) and Bourne Park (the whole estate surrounding Bourne Park House). If they would simply read reliable sources like those named above, they would see that, although the ground was within the Bourne Park estate, it was called Bishopsbourne Paddock.

You said in this edit summary that The name the place is actually called in all bar one, self published, source. Only one author refers to it was Bishopsbourne Paddock. Really? So, you changed the name on 10 June 2018, and your, er, "version", had six references. Three cited the Cambridge University reports; there was one each from Buckley and Haygarth (those two were already there but with incomplete information); and, of course, you added dear old CricketArchive.

Did you actually READ the U/C, Buckley, and Haygarth sources to verify that they called the ground Bourne Paddock? No, you did not, and you have yet again failed to render sourced content correctly, thereby introducing false information. Taking these one at a time:

• The Cambridge University team, as QUOTED in the current version of the article, referred to the cricket "pitch" as Bishopsbourne Paddock.

• Arthur Haygarth, whose Scores and Biographies is arguably the most eminent source for 18th century cricket, included numerous matches played on the ground between 1772 and 1790. He ALWAYS called it Bishopsbourne Paddock.

• G. B. Buckley, another respected author, is cited for the match in September 1766. His source was a local newspaper which, admittedly, did not name Bishopsbourne Paddock as the venue. But, it didn't say Bourne Paddock either—it reported a match at "Bourn Park", which is the name of the entire estate, not the cricket ground.

• The sixth citation is CricketArchive, which is not often right about cricket in the 18th century. And, guess what, it's wrong again.

As you can see in the current version, additional reputable sources have been found which all say the ground was called Bishopsbourne Paddock. I've removed CricketArchive because it is incorrect as regards this matter, and because it is unreliable for cricket up to at least 1825.

If you return to the site, please learn to read, and render, what sources actually say. By failing to do that, as is so often the case, you have introduced false information which breaches core policies such as WP:V, WP:NOR, and WP:TITLE. In the latter, you should note that Generally, article titles are based on what the subject is called in reliable sources.

Thank you. Jack (talk) 11:10, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

I never thought to check Samuel Britcher, who began his annual series in 1790, the year Mann left Bourne Park. As it happens, Britcher did capture the 1790 match. Which means that he, as a contemporary, is the key witness. He says the ground was called Bishopsbourne Paddock. I rest my case. Jack (talk) 20:33, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

3O

There is an entry at Wikipedia:Third opinion#Active disagreements concerning the issue raised above. I have requested that a 3O volunteer, who must be neutral, gives consideration to the title of this article, and the verification of its content.

I have notified User:Blue Square Thing at his talk page.

Thanks, Jack (talk) 20:23, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

3O Response: Procedural decline. There is no evidence that thorough discussion has yet occurred on this matter, a prerequisite for requesting a third opinion. If and when that happens, if you're still unable to reach a consensus, you're welcome to re-file. Otherwise, you're welcome to pursue other forms of dispute resolution. DonIago (talk) 23:52, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Okay, thanks, Doniago. Can't think what, if anything, to do next as BST is not going to respond. This is just one instance of a widespread issue. Thanks again, and all the best, Jack (talk) 08:51, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Have you reached out to the WikiProjects listed at the top of this page? If BST will not engage, I'd recommend getting the opinions of other editors with an interest in the subject of the article. DonIago (talk) 13:59, 1 June 2026 (UTC)