Double trouble with DOIs

Detective Matcher stopped abruptly behind the corner of a short building, praying that his loud heartbeat doesn’t give up his presence. This missing DOI case was unlike any other before, keeping him awake for many seconds already. It took a great effort and a good amount of help from his clever assistant Fuzzy Comparison to make sense of the sparse clues provided by Miss Unstructured Reference, an elegant young lady with a shy smile, who begged him to take up this case at any cost.


This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://0-www-crossref-org.library.scad.edu/blog/double-trouble-with-dois/
2 Likes

Hi @Crossref-team, it is such a good post! It would be nice if you put the figures in table’s format, for a better reading :wink:

1 Like

I’ll share your feedback, Arley! Thanks.

1 Like

I stumbled across this post in a recent Twitter conversation about duplicate DOIs (I can’t post a link but the Tweet is rdmpage/status/1513184259523162119) and I’ve blogged about this issue a number of times. The problem still exists (this community post is two years old). Are there any plans to address the issue? An obvious starting point would be to focus on JSTOR content as this seems to be a common denominator for many of the duplicate DOIs.

We’ve outlined a few things here in a new thread @rdmpage. And more to follow there too soon. Thanks for highlighting this issue.

2 Likes

@Ginny Thanks for the update. Look forward to learning more about the reanalysis. It would also be nice if the publishers and digital libraries involved contributed to this discussion so that the community as a whole can be more aware of the issues.

2 Likes