Talk:Radio-frequency quadrupole

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Electronics

	Electronics portal This article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Leave messages at the project talk pageElectronicsWikipedia:WikiProject ElectronicsTemplate:WikiProject Electronicselectronic
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to Radio-frequency quadrupole. Favonian (talk) 16:11, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Radio frequency quadrupole → Radio-frequency quadropole –

As in refs and article. Per WP:MOSCAPS ("Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization") and WP:TITLE, this is a generic, common term, not a propriety or commercial term, so the article title should be downcased. In addition, WP:MOSCAPS says that a compound item should not be upper-cased just because it is abbreviated with caps. Lowercase will match the formatting of related article titles.

Could someone please delete the typoed name I mistakenly created? Tony (talk) 02:08, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support This is indeed hyphenated in sources[1]. --Enric Naval (talk) 15:57, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – Tony's rationale is mixed up or out of sync, since he already fixed the case, and the spelling "quadrople" is worse than non-standard. Why not just move it to add the hyphen and be done with it? Dicklyon (talk) 22:35, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – I think the nom and the opposer and the supporter all agree that it should move to Radio-frequency quadrupole. An early close wouldn't hurt. Dicklyon (talk) 19:30, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Mass spectrometry

This device is used in mass spectrometry, correct? That is not clear from the article as currently written: it currently says this device is NOT used in one kind of mass spectrometry. LilacRabite (talk) 20:15, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]