CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Door-knocking prank

children's game

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 3, 2026
Entity authorityQ453123
Source-derived summary

A door-knocking prank, colloquially known variously as knocky-door neighbours; knock, knock, ginger; ding dong ditch; Chappy; and knock a door run amongst other names, is a prank or game that dates back to the traditional Cornish holiday of Nickanan Night where it was originally called Nicky Nicky nine doors in the 19th-century or possibly earlier. The game is played by children in a lot of cultures. It involves knocking on the front door (or ringing the doorbell) of a victim, then running away before the door can be answered. The only names listed in the Historical Thesaurus of English are runaway knock (attested 1813) and runaway ring (1790). "Runaway Knock" is the title of paintings depicting instances of the prank by George Cruikshank (1855) and Stanhope Forbes (1888).

Name variations

The game in various forms is known by different names geographically, including the following:

Europe

Belletje-trek (lit. transl. bell pull; Flanders, Belgium, Netherlands)

Bobby knocking (Wales)

Chickenelly, Chappy, Chappies, Chicky melly Chap-door-run (Scotland)

Cherry knocking (Gloucestershire, England)

Ding dong skoosh, Ring bang scoosh (Scotland)

Dyraat (Iceland)

Klingelstreich (Germany)

Knick knack (Dublin, Ireland)

Knock and nash (United Kingdom)

Knocky Eye Door (Cumbria, United Kingdom)

Knock and run (England)

Knock door run (Leicester, England, midlands)

Knock down ginger (England)

Knock off ginger (England)

North America

Ding dong ditch (United States)

Doorbell ditch (United States)

Doorbell dixie (United States)

Nicky Nicky Nine Doors (Canada)

Knock-knock ginger (Canada)

Ring and run (United States)

Sonne-décrisse (transl. ring–fuck off; Canada)

Oceania

Knick Knocking (Australia)

Postman's Knock (New Zealand)

Africa

Tok-tokkie (South Africa)

South America

Rín-Rín-Raja (Chile)

Tin-Tin Corre-Corre (Colombia)

Ring-Raje (Argentina)

Asia

Bel-Twi (벨튀, South Korea)

Ping-Pong Dash (ピンポンダッシュ, Japan)

Legality

United Kingdom

The Town Police Clauses Act 1847 made it a criminal offence in towns in England and Wales and Ireland to "wilfully and wantonly disturb any inhabitant, by pulling or ringing any door bell, or knocking at any door" punishable with up to 14 days' imprisonment. The provision was repealed for the Republic of Ireland in 2013 and for England and Wales in 2015; it remains in force in Northern Ireland.

England and Wales

The prankster can face charges of trespassing and disturbing the peace. In England and Wales, trespassing is a civil matter rather than a criminal one, and the police will not compile a case for a victim.

Editorial summary

“Door-knocking prank” enters the record as children's game. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Door-knocking, prank and children's can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1813, 1790, 1855, 1888—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Door-knocking, prank and children's.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Door-knocking prank” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Door-knocking, prank and children's provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 3, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q453123. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1813, 1790, 1855 and 1888.

Critical limits

The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Door-knocking prank”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Door-knocking prank primary sources, Door-knocking prank archive and Door-knocking research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Door-knocking prank”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Door-knocking prank” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.