One of the new checks is meant to be that "asterisk is not adjacent to underscore". However, it also rejects the following format: [W_]*liton I've replaced it with *liton, but I was trying to indicate that although the first part of the word was obscured (by dirt on the fiche), the first letter looked likely to be "W". (I know the missing letters are likely to be "il", but they were not visible.) If I'd used the format [_W]*liton, would that have been accepted (even though it doesn't convey exactly what I wanted)? Best wishes, Peter Dauncey South London, UK

Surely you must know what the first letter is, as all records are listed alphabetically?? If you were doing a section of W's, then the first letter can only be a "W" ???? John Fairlie Mail us at ..... john@fairlie.plus.com john.fairlie@blueyonder.co.uk Home page... http://www.fairlie.plus.com -----Original Message----- From: Peter Dauncey [mailto:peter@dauncey54.freeserve.co.uk] Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2003 8:29 PM To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Changes to upload format checking One of the new checks is meant to be that "asterisk is not adjacent to underscore". However, it also rejects the following format: [W_]*liton I've replaced it with *liton, but I was trying to indicate that although the first part of the word was obscured (by dirt on the fiche), the first letter looked likely to be "W". (I know the missing letters are likely to be "il", but they were not visible.) If I'd used the format [_W]*liton, would that have been accepted (even though it doesn't convey exactly what I wanted)? Best wishes, Peter Dauncey South London, UK ============================== To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237