John, so long as it is clearly written at the top of the page "For COWLEY see COWLE" or vice versa, and "see also COWELL" I don't think it matters at the moment, and could get you into a lot of strife trying to switch names around when many are so similar, and the spelling was often inconsistent. I would far rather you spent the time replacing the missing entries (sent to you last year) into Brian's Index of Registered Births 1821-1901 - and then leaving it strictly alone apart from corrections/additions from the register within that time period. Brian would have required a copy of a birth cert to change the record.

You wrote that you have now revised what you were doing in line with our suggestions, but the most important suggestion was to please leave Brian's original index as he wrote it from the actual register copies, and to put your additions into a separate file. All his explanatory notes and sources on the website refer to those dates, ending in 1900/01.

"A" now looks extremely muddled compared to how clear and straight forward it used to look. To order a birth cert within those dates the registry required only what Brian wrote, which was Name, Date, Parish, Page, Father, Mother.
By squashing in Volume numbers for the sake of the later entries it has forced the birth dates onto a second line, and they aren't necessary for the earlier time frame. And by expanding his names you are introducing errors. The third entry I looked at under "A" is "William Edwa ABRAHAMS 15 Nov 1886 Pee Samuel ABRAHAMS Sarah Jane CUBBON" on BL's recovered file. You have this as ABRAM, William Edward, 15 Nov 1886 Peel A1 234 ABRAM, Samuel, CUBBON, Sarah Jane.
Please don't reinvent the wheel when the index worked well as Brian had it!

And please make a separate file for the entries after 1901 so that it doesn't look such a mess. You could add your own explanatory notes to the new index, giving the sources used and the dates it covers, which are currently not given.

Additionally, you shouldn't be including birth years as recent as the two Acton ones in the 1940s. It is one thing having them included in scanned fiche like on manxbmd, but quite another having them on an index which can be located by anyone putting in the name on Google. I thought your original idea was to include them from the Index to Registered Births only up to 1911?

Sue