When we import references, bib 8 can use some fields to check whether a reference is in the database or not. It seems that the author information is used as one of the checking fields. I suggest not to include the author field. The reasons are follows
1) name of author does not show properly when it has some special languages.
2) different research data providers, such as Web of science and Scopus, may use different ways to set abbreviate for authors. For example, one provider may not include middle name, while others may use middle name.
A same reference may have different forms in the author names. This will cause bib 8 fail to find some duplicate references.
I suggest to use 'title', 'publication year' or 'publication source' such as 'journal' or 'publisher' as the checking fields.
For journal articles, 'title' , 'publication year' and 'journal' are good fields for checking whether there are duplicate references.
It will be best if we can choose the checking fields by ourself.
Thanks.
Using Jounral field has the
Using Jounral field has the same problem as Authors because different providers may use different form.
Paul, I find that most
Paul,
I find that most providers usually use some name for journal title. Such as scopus, web of science, and some specific journals. But for the author field, there is a little different. I really hope the author field should not be included into the checking fields. In most cases, the reference title and publication year are enough.
Another reason is that the author names are in full name when we get references directly from journal websites which provide recent articles. But we get abbreviated names from 'web of science' or 'scopus'. However, the journal titles are same in these cases.
I think the best way is to let users choose the checking fields. Users can change the default checking fields and these changes could be saved. This will be very useful for users who get references from multiple providers.
Thanks.
I will see if we can do that
I will see if we can do that in version 8. Thanks, Paul
about duplicate mark
When checking duplicate references, it seems that Bib 8 put duplicate mark on the older reference with smaller reference ID. It will be better to put the mark on the newer one with larger Ref ID. The reason is that we usually want to delete the references with the duplicate mark. Furthermore, the older references usually contain useful information such as attachment, categories and so on.
Thanks.
This will be implemented in
This will be implemented in v8. Thank for for your suggestion.
Eliminating Duplicates
I have eliminated a duplicate record and left the other one (its pair). However, I left on the database the one B8 identified as being the duplicate. This means the, now single record, has a duplicate icon (marking) to it, that I don't seem to be able to find a way to remove it. In short, how can I remove the duplicate icon from a record that is no longer a duplicate?
Please try "Edit | Toggle
Please try "Edit | Toggle Mark".
Eliminating duplicate mark
That's it. Thank you.!!