Just a couple warnings on currently malformed (in my opinion) ADS BibTeX. Feel free to include others; they might be useful for us to include in any new BibTeX bst development if they might help to give better published outcomes.
The main one and the cause of this issue is the (new) inclusion of both the publisher and the howpublished keys in ADS BibTeX. This solution to this malformed ADS BibTeX is if a publisher key is present then delete the howpublished key. It should not be there. The term publisher refers to the entity responsible for the record while howpublished refers to a BibTeX catch all field for odd-ball or unique items. There's absolutely no reason to include both.
Everything is an @article type. ADS often gives @article types for things that are not articles. This includes, for instance, Vizier data records (bibstem:ycat). These are datasets not articles. There are a variety of manual fixes one could make. For YCATs, change @article to @misc or @dataset (which falls back to @misc if the non-standard @dataset is not defined by your BibTeX style file).
Books and conference proceedings miss important publisher details. For whatever reason these fields used to exist in old ADS, but never made it through the metadata updates to new (not SciX, but the new one from mid-2010s) ADS. All this information is available in text form on the ADS landing pages, just not in the BibTeX. You'll have to enter the missing fields by hand, e.g., the keys: address, publisher etc.
Just a couple warnings on currently malformed (in my opinion) ADS BibTeX. Feel free to include others; they might be useful for us to include in any new BibTeX bst development if they might help to give better published outcomes.
publisherand thehowpublishedkeys in ADS BibTeX. This solution to this malformed ADS BibTeX is if a publisher key is present then delete thehowpublishedkey. It should not be there. The termpublisherrefers to the entity responsible for the record whilehowpublishedrefers to a BibTeX catch all field for odd-ball or unique items. There's absolutely no reason to include both.@articletype. ADS often gives@articletypes for things that are not articles. This includes, for instance, Vizier data records (bibstem:ycat). These are datasets not articles. There are a variety of manual fixes one could make. For YCATs, change@articleto@miscor@dataset(which falls back to@miscif the non-standard@datasetis not defined by your BibTeX style file).address,publisheretc.