Hi Carol You can get a limited result by typing in *alford (surname) June 1838 Marriages District 10 (I just happen to know this is one of the records that you uploaded). This only proves that your entry [R_] was not done in vain but hasn't totally answered your question. As an aside I was wondering why you used [R_] instead of _ ? To quote from our "Hints and Help For Beginners" guide. Put an underscore ( _ ) for each unreadable character if you are sure you can see how many there are (e.g put ___ if there are 3 unreadable characters.) Put an asterisk ( * ) for more than one unreadable character if you can't see how many there are. If you can't decide between 2 or more possible characters in a single position, put them in square brackets e.g. [79] would mean it's a 7 or a 9 (the seven is more likely so goes first). Regards Allan Raymond [email protected] http://www.btinternet.com/~allan_raymond/Monarchies_of_Europe.htm FreeBMD - putting birth marriages and deaths on the Internet http://FreeBMD.rootsweb.com/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Graham Hart" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: 18 July 2001 20:08 Subject: [Fwd: Search Too Complex] Forwarded from listowner. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Search Too Complex Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 12:49:56 -0600 From: "Max & Carol Scott" <[email protected]> Reply-To: "Max & Carol Scott" <[email protected]> To: "FREEBMD- DISCUSS" <[email protected]> When I looked at some of the data I had uploaded to Freebmd, I found that unless I entered exactly as, for example, this: [R_]adford it was unable to carry out my search, saying too complex. I had imagined that I would be able to search as: *adford but it appears not to be the case. Can I ask, therefore, it there is any merit in entering names with [_] as the initial letter. I had taken advice on this when I started as a newbie, but now I am wondering if I should be transcribing in some other way. Any help would be appreciated. Carol Scott