Comment 2 for bug 1164189

A few comments:

1) attacking this problem is a good idea
2) the regexp is likely too strict, there's no reason that numbers or lower-case letters might show up between the ()s, nor that there will even be (). we only look for a string of numbers at the end of the field in other cases
3) this will fall victim to the same underlying issue as authority merge, where the cascade of updating and reingesting many records will cause a timeout of the user-level delete action. See: bug 1193490

Particularly because of (3), this has a strong chance of generating user-level failures where there were none before. So, because this is more of an aesthetic issue than a data integrity one, my opinion is that this should wait until there is movement on bug 1193490 before applying.

I haven't the tuits ATM, but the problem addressed here might also benefit from some more thought WRT the possible queued reingest world.