The recent controversy and discussion starts with the publication of the report of a stabilized aninile radical cation.
Here the authors claim that they were able to stabilize the radical cation and report x-ray structures, electrochemical studies and some EPR data.
Shortly after this paper, two comments appear:
Comment on “Synthesis, Characterization, and Structures of Persistent Aniline Radical Cation”: It Is a Protonated Aniline and Not an Aniline Radical Cation
Comment on “Synthesis, Characterization, and Structures of a Persistent Aniline Radical Cation”: A New Interpretation Is Necessary
The commenters try to replicate the experiments and they basically say that it is not an aniline radical. They have some detailed studies and explanations.
Finally, the original authors publish a reply to those two comments here:
Reply to Comments on “Synthesis, Characterization, and Structures of Persistent Aniline Radical Cation”
The problem with the "reply" is that they accept some of their "mistakes" and claim that they obtained the aniline radical cation. But, they can't really clarify some of the other concerns that the commenters pointed out.
Really interesting read.