(I see now that the tweet replying to was *designers* not wanting to do them. But it's much funnier in my head if it's voice actors)

The idea that a game would be released where a character is suddenly voiced by a different VA when you are romancing them makes me giggle.

Also looks excellently Nabataean!

While her reply is not open access, she has luckily uploaded it on Academia.edu, and you can read it here:
www.academia.edu/173236081/Re...

Ultimately, I believe Vahidnia had the right idea to look for unique readings, but she used a source was not able to do this.

The editors have asked Vahidnia to publish a reply to my rather critical article, and published it in the same issue of the journal.

While the article may come off as grumpy, it has been my intent to write an article that lays out actionable principles for researchers working on Quranic manuscripts to identify canonical readings. Providing several accessible heuristic methods (and applying one myself).

Wikipedians really don't get enough credit

Oh very nice! I did not know about this! And I'm initially skeptical, would really want to examine the papyrus closely, but it wouldn't be he first time Quranic manuscripts are archaizing by a few centuries, so why not!

Dot under ح is really wild, never seen that!

In Kufi manuscripts you really only start seeing double dot qāf in 4th century manuscripts. Before that it's single dot. The orientation which letter gets dot above and which below can differ (should really be studied more closely, perhaps a geographic distribution? )

I don't think anyone has figured out what the rhyme or reason is behind when it uses the single or double dot qāf. Would be nice to study some time.

I've sometimes wondered if the double dot qāf is an addition by a later hand.

(Assuming you know this, but sharing for the rest of the readers).

Or. 298 is an interesting case because it seems to use both single dot qāf and double dot qāf. Probably the first signs of the double dot qāf developing.

Yeah, though palaeograohically the double dotted ق is just a later innovation. Early Kufi manuscripts (and likewise Or. 298!) have the Maghrebi distribution regardless of provenance. Double dotted ق only started being used in the 9th/10th century in the Mashreq.

I'm curious what makes you think it's a north African hand though!

Just echoing what others say: yes looks plausibly 9th century to me. Quite reminiscent of Or. 298 (our oldest paper manuscript, 866 CE). But later seems plausible too. Abbasid bookhand continues into the 10th century

Fun fact: tinariwen is the plural of tenere "desert".

It would count as gahawa syndrome, yes. But not many dialects in and around the Sahara that show evidence of said syndrome. But might just be European ears trying to make sense of the ḥr cluster.

I'm reminded of Sanaa < ṣan3ā'

It was fantastic, and still accessible through the Internet archive luckily!