@CrazyMerlyn:
Ion: An atomic or molecular particle having a net electric charge.
Not an atom with a net electric charge, but an atomic particle (i.e an atom like particle) with a net electric charge.
No, they're saying that it is a particle, which is either atomic or molecular in nature. That is, not a bulk substance, an individual particle (specifically, an atomic or molecular one, not an elementary or other subatomic one). Like when physicists write about atomic and molecular particle densities.
A very similar particle, but not the same thing.
Oh look, a recent physics paper regarding ionized atoms. It's easy to find references to ionized atoms in the scientific literature. Because they are atoms which are also ions.
Or you can look up papers on the ionization states of atoms.
Or you could ask yourself why papers (example) sometimes bother to specify "neutral atoms", or talk about "charged atoms".
This just solidifies what I am saying.
No it doesn't. It's defined as being a region of an atom; it doesn't really exist as a separate thing, just as the electron shell of an atom doesn't really exist as a thing separate from an atom.
An atom with no electrons just has empty electron shells.
If I say an Iron atom, it should have a definite meaning rather than various different radicals which can all be called an iron atom if we just look at chemical properties and not charge.
It does have a definite meaning: it means an atom with 26 protons (which means it will have certain chemical properties).
Your complaint would be equally applicable to the existence of different isotopes of atoms.
You use more specific terms when they're relevant: this particular ionization state of iron, this particular isotope of iron, etc. They're still iron atoms, because they still have the elemental chemical properties of iron. But you specify which form of the atom you're talking about, when it's relevant. When it's not, you generally just talk about 'iron atoms'.
It's true that people will also sometimes talk about "iron atoms" when they are specifically talking about non-ionized iron atoms, but for anyone familiar with the topic under discussion, it should be clear from context which meaning is being used (generally, it should be clear even to those not particularly familiar, like when they talk about "ion-atom interactions").