Talk:486

This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Years Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years 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.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Lists Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Languege Template of Japanese Link is Missing. An error linkd ja:486, and correct link right ja:Intel 486. --61.125.222.70 (talk) 12:42, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no error. The Japanese Interwiki link is there, just before the Nnapulitano link (nap:) and it links correctly. Since this article is about the year AD 486 (ten years after the fall of the Western Roman Empire), it should not link to the japanese article about the computer processor. /Ludde23 ^{Talk Contrib} 14:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

THANKS your talk. I am sorry, its mistaken idea.--61.125.222.70 (talk) 06:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this page is horrible and linking to this page is a horrible mash of automated data-linking, and real linking meaning to go to the processor.

whoever made the templete boxes relys on these articles being simply a number,

why should any random number automatically referrer to a year?? this is nutty.Scientus (talk) 10:53, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I too came looking for information about THE 486, not information about some long-past year with a one-sentence stub of an article where Romans interact with Gaul in some historic footnote. Not that I think that there should be no article about whatever happened in 486 - just adding my voice to the chorus - why can't it be at least a disambiguation page by default? Maybe the template boxes referred to by Scientus could be rewritten? 125.236.211.165 (talk) 03:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]