google books bibtex

Mike Marchywka marchywka at
Sun Dec 8 20:28:33 CET 2019

On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 08:11:41AM +1300, Alan Litchfield wrote:
>    I do not rely on them, nor many of the database bibtex entries. I have to instruct my students constantly to repair them
>    before using, but the effort is relatively minor with a text editor.
So far the entries from crossref look good most of the time but getting away from "articles" is another issue. 
Its amazingly distracting though to read literature
and then debug a bibtex entry or script in the middle of a paragraph finally starting to come together :)
Someone earlier claime Zotero had this fixed although I was curious how these things could be fixed
if the info was missing from the available entries. I'm moving my bash script to c++ and now it
will eventually try to get all available for comparison and maybe manual intervention ( similar to a code merge tool
probably lol ). Non-DOI documents are still interesting but I've found enough patterns in the sites it
is getting easier to scrape if the info is there.  
>    --
>    Dr Alan Litchfield
>    AlphaByte
>    PO Box 1941
>    Auckland, New Zealand 1140
>    On 9/12/2019, at 05:39, Peter Flynn <[mailto:peter at]peter at> wrote:
>    On 07/12/2019 11:26, Mike Marchywka wrote:
>      Has anyone had problems with the google bibtex entries?
>    My experience is that they're entirely machine-generated, so they suffer from a lack of source metadata and inaccuracy in
>    its application.

I can believe that in an old publication there will be problems but there were things like "..." in important
places... IIRC the scholar citations were very minimalist. 

>    P


mike marchywka
306 charles cox
canton GA 30115
USA, Earth 
marchywka at
ORCID: 0000-0001-9237-455X

More information about the texhax mailing list