Upgrade StorageEdit auto-complete autor fields
When importing a article say with DOI, the author field is not always the same. So depending on how the journal has the author save John Nigle Smith can become J. Smith, J. N. Smith, John N. Smith, J. Nigle Smith, etc.
Now if you were then to enter another article with the same author, the auto-complete will give you all the different version that have previously been used.
This is not too much of a proble, except when you come to Insert differnt citation by the same author in a word document, with a Harvard style (Surname, Date) instead of just getting (Smith, 2000) you get the different versions of Smith eg (J. N. Smith, 2000), (J. Smith, 2004), (John N. Smith, 2007) etc.
The only fix I have found is to find all the John Nigle Smith in my Zotero database and make sure that they are all the same. After doing a refresh in the word document all the refrences with Smith become (Smith, Date).
What therefore would be usefull would be someway of opening all the auto-complete authors, so that duplicate authors that have been written in differnt ways can be deleted.
Hope this makes sense
Now if you were then to enter another article with the same author, the auto-complete will give you all the different version that have previously been used.
This is not too much of a proble, except when you come to Insert differnt citation by the same author in a word document, with a Harvard style (Surname, Date) instead of just getting (Smith, 2000) you get the different versions of Smith eg (J. N. Smith, 2000), (J. Smith, 2004), (John N. Smith, 2007) etc.
The only fix I have found is to find all the John Nigle Smith in my Zotero database and make sure that they are all the same. After doing a refresh in the word document all the refrences with Smith become (Smith, Date).
What therefore would be usefull would be someway of opening all the auto-complete authors, so that duplicate authors that have been written in differnt ways can be deleted.
Hope this makes sense
This is an old discussion that has not been active in a long time. Instead of commenting here, you should start a new discussion. If you think the content of this discussion is still relevant, you can link to it from your new discussion.