Template talk:Double underline

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Typography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Typography 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.TypographyWikipedia:WikiProject TypographyTemplate:WikiProject TypographyTypography articles

Writing systems

This template falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system articles

Sandbox version

I have created and editted the sandbox version of this template to use CSS instead of HTML to underline text and change the color. I will wait for a reply for two days before adding {{Edit protected}} to have the sandbox version copied into the main version in case there are any objections. – Allen4names 06:48, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{Edit protected}} Please edit this template to match the sandbox version. – Allen4names 19:08, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. rʨanaɢ (talk) 19:34, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. – Allen4names 20:09, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 20 March 2014

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please consider editing this template to match the sandbox version I just edited. I'm seeing an improvement at Template:Double_underline/testcases: File:Screen_Shot_-_Template--Double_underline--testcases.png. --Elvey (talk) 19:19, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Hold on -~~ It's improved in the general case too, for green~~, but is worse for the default.~~ ~~Need to figure out why Template:Double_underline2 doesn't have this problem~~.--Elvey (talk) 19:39, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I think it's good to go. --Elvey (talk) 20:02, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Redrose64 (talk) 20:58, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]