Are you sure that they have exactly the same URL, symbol by symbol, up to the very end? Otherwise you might need to use the “Expert mode“ to ignore different aspects of the URL or to use another criteria than the URL to determine duplicates. However, I would not advise you to do so unless you exactly understand what you are doing in this mode, as this might consider much more bookmarks as duplicates than you would like to.

Reply to your reply: By design, the extension does what it says, namely removing duplicate bookmarks. If you want something else - removing *similar* bookmarks - you can get this feature in expert mode; but it lies in the nature of things that this is a very dangerous feature. Especially if you do not understand exactly what is "similar" by the regular expressions you chose, chances are high that you remove bookmarks you actually wanted to keep. If it worked for your use case, that's fine for you, but unless you re-check very carefully manually, chances are high that you remove too much this way.

> how to navigate around the complexity of this extension.

Do not enable "expert mode".

> It takes approximately 1.7 seconds to delete one single "dupes".

If it takes more than milliseconds (in average) to delete a bookmark, something is wrong on your system. It might be running out of memory. A more frequent cause for big latencies is that another tool is interfering, for instance another bookmark extension.

> Extention doesn't scan ALL your bookmarks (across different folders and subfolders) at once

This is incorrect. The name (path) of bookmarks is completely ignored for detecting duplicates (if expert mode is disabled).

> Even then, it's not detecting duplicate urls within the same folder (most of the time).

Two bookmarks are considered identical if their URL is *exactly* the same string. Only in expert mode, you can configure different rules, but this requires that you specify very precisely what you want to consider matching.

> It's overly complex and needs to be simplified

Specifying different rules than identical strings for URLs *is* a very complex problem and can find unexpected dupes especially for apparently simple rules. This lies in the nature of things. That's why "expert mode" is usually not recommended (unless you really understand regular expressions and carefully read the instructions).

The extension does what you tell it to: If you mark all and then press remove all marked it will of course remove all. (Why is "mark all" an option: There are dozens of marking options for selecting all but one in certain groups of dupes, and "mark all" is the one where you need to do the (de-)selection manually, typically one in each group.)

If you removed too many bookmarks by mistake, it is normally not a problem: firefox keeps a copy of previous bookmarks. Just go to "Bookmarks -> Manage Bookmarks" and then under "Import and Backup -> Restore ->" there will pop up a list of automatic bookmark backups from which you can restore one.

Presumably you selected "mark all" and then "move marked bookmarks to dupe".

Note that firefox makes regular backups of your bookmarks: You can restore to a previous stage by opening "Bookmarks -> Show all bookmarks" and there "Import and Backup -> Restore".

Can you please be more precise what is corrupt? Have you downloaded the add-on from mozilla.org?

If you describe the problem in more detail, maybe I can help.
However, I suggest to discuss this either by private mail or on the github bug page, since this medium here is not appropriate for a conversation with successive questions + answers.

Which platform do you use and which browser (exact version)?
If possible, please write a bugreport on the github page which is more appropriate to discuss technical details.

It is the first time that somebody reports such a problem; I was not able to reproduce it.

Edit:

Now bookmarkdupes 4.0 is out. Internally, this is a major internal rewrite, so it might have fixed your problem.

If the problem should persist, I would appreciate if you open a bug on github (or if necessary write me an email) so that we can discuss technical details.

Edit:

There was an edit of the comment indicating that there is perhaps really a bug in bookmark-dupes (although so far, I was not able to produce the described problem in any testing and had no other such report.)

Since I had switched off localization of bookmarkdupes' webpage (due to various problems) it seems that all related edits of this discussion got lost.

For reasons like this, this is not a good medium for communication about a bug.

Therefore, I opened https://github.com/vaeth/bookmarkdupes/issues/22 (but if you prefer we can also discuss instead by email).

Translations are always welcome, of course. (Preferably by a pull request on github, but if you are not familiar with git, drop me a note and we will find another way.)