Only include batch metadata with exact author/title match

[iBookMan]

I feel sure there must be a way to force calibre, when using batch metadata download (ctrl+D with multiple books selected), to only override the book when it is the same book based upon author and title, possibly without an, the, punctuation, etc. I keep getting my authors and titles overlaid by other books, which indeed show up when I do a manual "get metadata" from the book details of one book, and they show up at the top, but they are not the right book title or author.

I looked in options and even the tweaks to no avail, and searched the forums. Could someone help me figure out this setting?

Thanks!

[iBookMan]

Still no replies? Maybe this isn't as easy as I thought it ought to be, or I just wasn't clear in my desperate request for help. Here's an example:
The ebook has metadata Title="The Count of Monte Cristo" and Author(s): "Alexandre Dumas" with no ID's. When I control+D on this for batch metadata update, I get back a new title "The Count of Monte Cristo (SparkNotes Literature Guide)" and author "Alexandre Dumas & Sparknotes Editors". Then, since I'm doing multiple books, I have to open it to see which one it is, blank out the ID's and tags and some other fields, and change the title and author back.

If I do a manual Get Metadata using the button at the bottom of the "edit metadata" dialog, I get the sparknotes book as the number one selection, with the actual book as the second thru 5th options with number 3 being probably the most correct. I'd rather have the batch lookup NOT overlay the title and cover than force the wrong one in. I can go back and manually get the metadata when the results are like this. Actually, I'm surprised it doesn't automatically select the second one since it is a closer match to the real title and author(s).

Should I enter this as an enhancement request?

Thanks.

[BetterRed]

Couple of things - there's a plugin called Extract ISBN, it looks inside the books for an ISBN and sticks in the ID field - if you use it (you can run it on multiple books) before doing the metadata downloads then generally speaking you'll get better results.

If you configure the Download sources to suit your 'tastes' you wont get as much rubbish - eg many folks don't accept tags from the likes of Google or Amazon, other's don't like B&N's summaries.

But its an inexact process especially when using bulk downloads

Having said all that, having something similar to the matching rules in the Find Duplicates plug-in (see attachment) would useful for bulk metadata downloads, even better if it could could flag books that didn't get their metadata updated

BR

ps : I suspect your request got pushed down the stack so that it fell off the first page faster than normal - its the sort of request that should have elicited at least one response - if only from me.

[regori]

Has there been a solution to this thread?
Or was it simply ignored???

Anyhow, the topic is still unsolved and I would really appreciate to get a solution for this.

[theducks]

Originally Posted by regori

Has there been a solution to this thread?
Or was it simply ignored???

Anyhow, the topic is still unsolved and I would really appreciate to get a solution for this.

Ctrl-D without a (usable) entry in {identifiers} is a crap shoot. This applies to Single or Bulk modes.

2 ways to cherry pick metadata

If the Identifier is good
Ctrl-D along with Review Results button, lets you keep the existing fields (or cover) by using the copy-arrows in between old and proposed, OR simply reject what you see. You also get to edit the Left side (but not force it blank if there was data on the Right)

If you are not sure what those identifiers will return ( there is a lot of poor data out there)
Use the Get Metadata from the BULK Metadata Edit screen and step through the titles, cherry picking which return to use.
You can use the Mouse to copy things like comments to the clipboard, then select a different result and paste from the clipboard


There is no Magic way to get clean metadata. We can't even agree on what is Clean

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by theducks

We can't even agree on what is Clean

As in all things, less is better, least is best