Abstract
We challenge the assignment of the oxidation state +2 for beryllium and magnesium in the complexes Be(cAAC(Dip))(2) and Mg(cAAC(Dip))(2) as suggested by Gimferrer et al., Chem. Sci. 2022, 13, 6583 in a recent study. A careful review of the data in the ESI contradicts their own statement and shows that the results support the earlier suggestion that the metals are in the zero oxidation state. The authors reported wrong data for the excitation energies of Be and Mg to the (1)D (np(2)) state. We also correct some misleading statements about the EDA method.