In Bookwyrm there are way too many duplicate authors and books, and a way to merge them is unclear.

Open Library seems to offer a more unified and consistent database.

  • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Considering who is behind it, I just use Open Library. In particular because like you say, their actual data is much more useful.

      • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        Other way around. Open Library is part of the internet archive. Given it’s also vastly superior in quality and has tools to maintain and administrate the data, I very much prefer it over alternative offerings. If Bookwyrm at least had a curation/maintainence team or support group or something, and not everyone could just nilly-willy add duplicates of existing entries, then I could see more use for it.

        But like others have said, it’s also a bit of a different use case. If you want to pull data, definitely do it from OL. They’re the same source Bookwyrm uses for its main data import, after all.