Talk:Mochii

Dimensions
I changed  to   per the last main bullet point at MOS:UNITSYMBOLS in Wikipedia's Manual of Style. The reasons are: The template makes formatting values easy, taking care of using the correct spaces and separators so the user doesn't have to remember these style details.
 * The proper separator in dimensions is the multiplication sign  (U+00D7), not the letter  . This can also be created with the HTML entity.
 * The unit symbol 'cm' should have a non-breaking space (U+00A0; HTML entity ) in front of it so as to keep it together with the value (1.5) on the same line.
 * The  separators also should have non-breaking spaces in front of, and optionally behind, them.
 * I believe  is more formal/encyclopedic language than "is $2 cm$ large."

FWIW, I personally don't like the repetition of the 'cm', and wouldn't have done it this way in a manually formatted document where I could ensure the whole dimensions statement would be kept together on one line, but WP articles need to be read in different forms on differently-sized screens, paper, font sizes, etc. Line breaks may occur after one of the separators, so I see why we have to do it this way. Putting the whole thing inside would solve that issue, but may be ugly, leaving too much whitespace at the end of the line before it if it's forced onto a new line (and the MoS doesn't suggest this alternative).

Incidentally, the infobox has the dimensions in mm and this seems to be a common choice for sub-meter dimensions. Should mm be used (instead of cm) in the text as well? —[ Alan M 1  (talk) ]— 16:06, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Power supply
In the specification section, and I disagree over the presence of the sentence It uses a 110–240 VAC, 50–60 Hz power supply. Power input requirement is a common, important characteristic of any device that needs power. My edit summary was Power requirement is an important specification. A 110V-60Hz-only device can't be used in much of the world that uses 240 V / 50 Hz. ThatMontrealIP reverted with the summary We are not a product catalog. I believe it's a minimal, appropriate mention and should remain in the article. Thoughts? —[ Alan M 1  (talk) ]— 16:50, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
 * We are Wikipedia, rather than a product catalog. The people who buy this are not using Wikipedia to specify the unit's operating voltage. Users of SEMs are also pretty savvy, they know to check the specs on the manufacturer's web site before buying! The operating voltage is of interest only to buyers and not to a general audience. And the statement that "it cannot beused in much of the world" is incorrect, as it just requires a trnasformer. In any case, it is not a certainty that this article will be published as it is essentially a product ad.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
 * (ec) The Microscopy Today source said, "This SEM runs on 110/240 VAC, consumes under 85 W, and pumps down in as little as 3 minutes.", including two additional details which I would like to include, too, since they seemed important enough to them to mention, and draw further contrast with older devices. As an EE, I should have been more precise above and said, "cannot be used without additional equipment" (not necessarily merely a transformer, depending on the exact design of the power supply, because of the frequency difference). —[  Alan M 1  (talk) ]— 17:12, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
 * if you're an electrical engineer then you know that the operating power supply frequency of a device is of little interest to a general audience. The people buying this will carefully spec it out, and they will not be doing that on a WP page.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:42, 29 April 2020 (UTC)