As long as it's just a Technical Comments section - an obvious concern
would be the signal/noise in the comments themselves. I'm sure PDB
would not relish having to moderate that lot.
Alternatively PDB can overtly link to papers that discuss technical
issues that reference the particular structure - wrong or fraudulent
structures are often associated with refereed publications that point
that out, and structures with significant errors often show up in that
way too. I once did a journal club on Muller (2013) Acta Cryst
F69:1071-1076 and wish that could be associated with the relevant PDB
file(s).
Phil Jeffrey
Princeton
On 5/14/14 1:37 PM, Gloria Borgstahl wrote:
I vote for Z's idea
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:32 PM, Zachary Wood <z...@bmb.uga.edu
<mailto:z...@bmb.uga.edu>> wrote:
Hello All,
Instead of placing the additional burden of policing on the good
people at the PDB, perhaps the entry page for each structure could
contain a comments section. Then the community could point out
serious concerns for the less informed users. At least that will
give users some warning in the case of particularly worrisome
structures. The authors of course could still reply to defend their
structure, and it may encourage some people to even correct their
errors.
Best regards,
Z
***********************************************
Zachary A. Wood, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology
University of Georgia
Life Sciences Building, Rm A426B
120 Green Street
Athens, GA 30602-7229
Office: 706-583-0304 <tel:706-583-0304>
Lab: 706-583-0303 <tel:706-583-0303>
FAX: 706-542-1738 <tel:706-542-1738>
***********************************************
