it's clear that google has gotten their legs under them in regard to doing the scanning. let's hope that they'll get their quality-control under control very soon too...
I have found less missing pages and other problems in books from Google then in those from the MBP and Canadian/IA. They are, however, still far from perfect. When they get a report regarding a missing or wrongly scanned page in a PD book; it is apparently up to the providing library to get the problem sorted out. I've heard report of complete books being rescanned (with the risk of having another page missing in the end ;) ). I've also heard somebody mentioning that the full rescanned book was stuck behind the existing one (rather space consuming, but for DP purposes a lot saver. What worries me in this is that Google doesn't seem to care whether pages are missing or not... as long as they get 99% of the pages from a book stored, changes are most search terms pointing to the particular book will be identified. Their interest lies in people purchasing the book via Amazon, Abe etc. after identifying them via book.google.com. The best quality control I have encountered so far is on Gallica, where appart from missing pages due to those pages missing in the original scanned manuscript, I've not encountered incomplete books. I'd be actually interesting to see how they perfrom their quality control. Frank