Correcting the record of structural publications requires joint effort of the community and journal editors.

Seriously flawed and even fictional models of biomolecular crystal structures, although rare, still persist in the record of structural repositories and databases. The ensuing problems of database contamination and persistence of publications based on incorrect structure models must be effectively addressed. The burden cannot be simply left to the critical voices who take the effort to contribute dissenting comments that are mostly ignored. The entire structural biology community, and particularly the journal editors who exercise significant power in this respect, must engage in a constructive dialog lest structural biology lose its credibility as an evidence-based empirical science.