Hello everyone I know our marvellous FreeBMD admins have more than enough work to do, but could I please make a suggestion to put on the list for the next time the TKB is updated? Recently several of my volunteers have been confused by the wording of TKB 6(d) on how to handle handwritten amendments. In these cases, an entire line was crossed through; the pages had two handwritten late entries referring to the same person, one of which was crossed out. The deleted line should have been included, following TKB 6(z): "Include the entry and then in the line underneath put: #COMMENT Entry crossed through. " http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#6z But the volunteers found 6(d) and thought this applied: "If the original entry is crossed out, transcribe the entry with the amendment and add comment such as: #COMMENT handwritten amendment of crossed out page number XXX" http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#6d I think 6(d)'s use of "entry" in the phrase "if the original ENTRY is crossed out" (my emphasis) is what confused people; they thought it meant the whole record, when what it's talking about is an amendment to a field (page number in the example). 6(z) is clear, mentioning "all the fields" being crossed out, but unfortunately 6(d) gets seen first :-) Might it be a good idea for 6(d) to include a sentence such as "If the entire line is crossed out, see 6(z)"? And/or for "field" to be substituted for "entry" in the first mention? I'd be glad to hear what others think. -- Nowl