When using FindDuplicate to check for existing records the check for suggestions is too strict. Entering an author's name in direct order: John Jacob Jingleheiner-Schmidt Will not match Jingleheimer-Schmidt, John Jacob Entering partial title: The vixens Will not match: The vixens. A novel.
I'm not sure what's in the scope of this bug, but another thing to consider is item type. For example, a suggestion for a movie might reveal the novel adaptation, or vice versa.
This adds an extra step to the process, and generally is just a pain (as well as making us look silly with what it thinks are potential duplicates).
I was thinking a lot about FindDuplicate today and the merits of "exact" vs inexact searches... If you don't use an "exact" search, "The vixens" would also match "Wild vixens: how foxes raise cubs in nature". I think the sorting is based on biblionumber so you'll just get the earliest catalogued "vixens", since we only take the top result from the search results for FindDuplicate.
Perhaps this could even be marked as a duplicate of bug 15248? Making it configurable could be the best solution for everyone.
*** Bug 33969 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I believe especially for short titles a keyword search would be too strict. Maybe a phrase would something we could try, but if it gives too many false positives, people will be annoyed.