oreillyrel

This is an interesting point. The main reason I cite Model Graphix is because it is the only confirmable, printed source I can find that mentions the ram jet engines of the VF-4. Mr March has lineart on his website pointing them out (see discussion on pg 38), but as I cannot verify the source of the lineart, I couldn't cite it.

That's the problem. This Model Graphix magazine issue specifically warns readers, in writing in the beginning, not to cite it as a Macross source.

And one does have to be a bit careful about excluding things like modeling magazines as sources. Take Great Mechanics.DX, without it we wouldn't have statistical information on the VF-25, VF-27, Macross Quarter, Battle Galaxy, and Battle Frontier. (Of course, a good chunk of the VF-25 stats were later confirmed in the model kit.)

No one is saying that all modeling magazines are unofficial sources--just the Model Graphix issues that specifically lists a disclaimer that it is unofficial for Macross. And a Wikipedia article.

You do realize that it was fixed in the last update, preceeding your post herein, right?

If that error was being fixed after the post before mine, then why did that post mention "Re: the VF-X-3 and two modes: Shoji Kawamori Macross Design Works pg 66"? Especially since that page doesn't mention the VF-X-3 at all?

Ah, so that's it. You're insulting myself, Mr March, and all the MW members by unilaterally and arbitrarily deciding what is, or is not canon and assuming that we are incapable of determing that for ourselves.

Do take note, that I've never stated that the stats I've presented should be copied wholesale to his, or anyone else's webpage, just that there may be information in it that Mr March may wish to add to his website.

In the future, please establish what you consider an official source first, before dismissing content as being non-canon.

I did, in my first two posts.

http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?...mp;#entry694213

http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?...st&p=694257

I'm not the one that decided that Model Graphix #290 is not canon for Macross. Model Graphix #290 itself printed a disclaimer that it is not official. An earlier post in this thread incorrectly declared information from Wikipedia and the magazine as "canon."

http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?...st&p=694008

I only pointed out where the information comes from is not official. The burden of proof is upon those who declare a Model Graphix issue--with an "unofficial" disclaimer--and a Wikipedia article are sources for "canon" Macross information, not upon those that point out otherwise.

No, it's not. You're attempting to combine two different issues from two different discussions.

The issue herein is citing a source, period.

As Mr March said, this part of this thread originated with a claim that a source says something "in error" when it doesn't.

Ok, thanks. Got an episode number?

Uh, Bolognese is the first ship listed by name in 2045 in the first episode of Macross 7 itself.

Please refer to TiaS: Macross Plus pgs 66, 67. It should be kept in mind that the source text is in Japanese. A language with different characteristics than English. One of the big differences is the lack of a need to repeat the subject once it has been firmly established.

There is, of course, the probability of a mistranslation, as I did only a scanlation and not a proper translation of the text in question. Nevertheless, this is another example of there being sources to the information in addition to the wiki article.

Yes, there is a possibility of a mistranslation. TiaS: Macross Plus pgs 66, 67 do not state that the image on Macross Perfect Memory is the VF-X-3, nor does it state that either the VF-X-3 or the VF-X-4 is "limited to fighter and gerwalk modes, only."

Looking back to the start of this debate, I find it amusing that much of the information in it can also be found in the Compendium, yet you still posted:

It begs the question, have you checked any of the other sources cited?

Yes, I have checked the sources cited. Yes, there is much information that is misidentified as canon in that macrossroleplay page, but is not in the Compendium or any official source.

Re: the VF-X-3 and two modes: Shoji Kawamori Macross Design Works pg 66. However, I'll accept the point and rephrase things to be less... pessimistic.

Shoji Kawamori Macross Design Works pg 66 does not state that the VF-X-3 has two modes or has two modes only. It doesn't say anything about the VF-X-3. The claim that "both the VF-X-3 and VF-X-4 are limited to fighter and gerwalk modes, only" comes directly from the Japanese Wikipedia page and not an official source.

Re: sources - they exist. Unlike some translations (looks at the Compendium), I'm doing my best to include source publications and even page numbers in the citations I make.

The issue here seems to be citing sources as canon when they are not, or asserting a source makes statements when it doesn't.

Bolognese is a prime example. What's the source of the name? This source is the only publication other than the Compendium that I have seen the name.

Uh, Bolognese is the first ship listed by name in 2045 in the first episode of Macross 7 itself. It is referenced again more than once later in the series.

Macross Perfect Memory Pg 68 VFX-3, VFX-4 mentioned.

(same) Pg 160 VF-X-4 mentioned and lineart shown leaving only the VF-X-3 unclear.

and from the Compendium "Since the VF-X-3 was developed primarily from the VF-1 Valkyrie's designs,"

The image shown looks primarily like the VF-1, does it not?

That's the dangerous part of speculation--assuming from what is unclear and jumping to conclusions. The official info on the VF-4 program say that it also has more than one prototype of varying degrees of VF-1 parts use. Stating "That'd be the VF-X-3" is jumping to a conclusion.

Re: 2 mode limitations: again, refer to the artwork provided. Multiple sources, eh.

There is no currently official source that states that it is "limited to fighter and gerwalk modes, only." There is a difference between stating that it can do at least two modes, and it stating it can do two modes, "only."

Nevertheless, it looks like we're reaching the point where we'll disagree until we get a Macross Chronicle article on it. If one is planned, that is...

Until then, people should be more careful of asserting that a source states more than it really does.

That'd be the VF-X-3.

Actually, Macross Perfect Memory never labeled it as the VF-X-3. That's fan speculation.

Is the other version referred to this one? http://www.robotechresearch.com/rpg/mecha/...ing/vf_x_4.html

It should be noted that both the VF-X-3 and VF-X-4 are limited to fighter and gerwalk modes, only.

That 2-mode-only claim comes from the Wikipedia article.

I am not disagreeing completely with your assertion. However, I did not rely solely on that article. All references used are:

and I forgot to add Model Graphix #290.

Model Graphix #290 has a disclaimer on page 10 that says that materials that appears in Model Graphix but not in actual official material is solely the magazine's and unofficial. Essentially, anything that's only in the Wikipedia or only in Model Graphix is not canon.

Finished the VF-4 stats: http://www.macrossroleplay.org/Sketchley/S.../VF-4/VF-4.html

Yeah, I know your policy, however I've put everything canon in green. Just avoid the black text.

Much of the green text is not actually canon information. They were added to the Japanese wikipedia article by an anonymous editor without sources.

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/ラ|...12540;ズ)

That's splitting hairs mighty thin and a distinction not made until now.

From my earlier post:

I was first replying to another poster's general impression of accuracy, so I naturally first replied with general statements and drilled down later.

I think I had made that distinction.

You may have had the best of intentions, but that's not how you came across.

From my first post in this thread:

Lots of great fan-colored images, but be careful on relying on the non-Compendium specs. Those non-Compendium specs has the same issues as those in mahq.net--they often fill in blanks in official materials with fan-invented or incorrect info.

I mean, I complimented the most unique feature of the site in my first post. My original advice to others still stands.

Feel free to submit more specific help and thanks for enjoying the site.

I look forward to the Macross II corrections/retractions described above.

There seems to be some misunderstanding. I wasn't implying that it was a private exchange or using that as an "excuse." I was just talking in general terms at first since I was replying to posters that were talking in general terms as well. The first poster was also referring to the non-Compendium information mixed in with the 99% accurate information derived from the Compendium. It's not the 99% of the information that is derived from the Compendium that has the issues.

Lastly, please note that the constructive criticism is intended to be helpful. Your replies come across as making assumptions about my posts and resistant to constructive criticism, when all my replies addressed only the material and never criticized any person personally. Nevertheless, I thank you for making those corrections, and I hope more of the corrections are made as well as more care is taken on adding new material and checking old material.

Okay oreillyrel, if you had specific examples of exactly what was wrong you should have written them out a half dozen posts ago instead of carrying on with these non-specific complaints and giving no reasons to support yourself. We basically had to jump through hoops and pry the answers out of you.

Well, I did say specifically that it was the power/engine stats that were wrong, but that was somehow misinterpreted to mean length and displacement stats. I was first replying to another poster's general impression of accuracy, so I naturally first replied with general statements and drilled down later.

Now, the OTEC designation is an error on my part, so it can be fixed. So, what companies that you've implied ARE listed in the texts? If there are none, that's fine, but let me know. Supply what information there is and say why you think something is wrong.

Now, next question; if the figures for the VF-2SS are not in Entertainment Bible #51 are there any figures that are in that book? Further, are you certain the figures aren't referenced in another Macross II book? Are you of the opinion that the figures are just totally bogus and why? Again, help me out here.

For the Einstein, there are no listed companies in that book and linked image, compared to the New Macross Class elsewhere.

There are no numerical figures for the VF-2SS in that book besides transformation times (unless 2 beam weapons and 2 missile pods count as numerical figures). I'm certain those particular RPG figures are not in the original Japanese release of Macross II, EB51 and the This is Animation book.

Also, make sure you look at the situation from my point of view: I sometimes have fans telling me my information is incorrect, but when they tell me why (they saw it on another website, a website which I know to be wrong) it's obvious I don't want to repeat a mistake by using their "correction".

And please make sure you look at the situation for my point of view. I first posted in this thread when another poster said this site had unique specs, so I cautioned the poster that many of those unique specs are fan-invented or incorrect. Then another poster said those specs are checked carefully against official stats, so it is quite apparent that there are impressions of the site that are not accurate.

Lastly, no one claimed the Macross Mecha Manual was official (especially since the exact opposite is stated right on the main page) and no one claimed to be an expert, myself least of all. You're obviously under some mistaken impression. But the website can't become better if all you're going to do is throw complaints and not lift a finger to help. Other members here have often sent me factual corrections, pointed out spelling/grammar mistakes and even provided scans for me to use. And they didn't have to be interrogated to do it.

Moral of the story: you have a rare opportunity here where the website owner is available to engage fans and site visitors in the interests of making a better site, so be more specific and get to the point. No one likes to be run around.

My concern is not that the Macross Mecha Manual is considered official, but that official and unofficial information are mixed together with no distinction, even though we're told that "when unofficial information is added, I make every effort to distinguish it." Judging by the comments earlier in this thread, there are people who are under the mistaken impression that all the information is expertly and carefully checked against official materials. It is because of those impressions that I posted, not because I shared those impressions.

I know you must have to deal with this "My website can beat up your website," cr@p alot Marchie. I for one want to give you an unqualified pat on the back for your efforts in gathering all the Macross Mecha info and making it accessible in English to everybody.

These comments aren't meant to take away from the work on the image coloring. They're just cautionary notes that the added info (like Mr. March said) are not official or completely accurate, since the comments in this thread indicate that this impression is out there.

Talk is cheap, please provide proof.

*Waits for proof, taps fingers on desk...*

http://macross.anime.net/wiki/Macross_Quarter

Notice it doesn't list the power plant stuff that the Macross Mecha Manual incorrectly does.

Macross 7 Animation Materials, pg. 160-170

Actually, you can just look at the link above for the Einstein. (It's page 168.) Notice it doesn't list the power plant stuff that the Macross Mecha Manual incorrectly does.

Entertainment Bible.51 Super Dimension Fortress Macross, pg. 4-7, 97-99

Ironically, I'm being asked to provide proof of the negative. The burden of proof actually belongs to those who claim these stuff are official, when they are not in the official Japanese sources.

I'm really confused.

First off, the Macross Quarter entry on the Macross Mecha Manual has virtually no stats at all. Also, the Macross Quarter is NOT a New Macross Class vessel; the Macross Quarter is a totally new class of ship.

That's the issue. The Macross Quarter is not a New Macross Class vessel, but the Macross Mecha Manual says it has the same power plant manufacturers as a copy-and-paste from the New Macross Class stats. That's not from official materials for the Macross Quarter.

Second, the statistics for all the Macross 7 fleet ships (Einstein, Hollywood, Mark Twain, Sunnyflower, Three Star, West Point) are all official numbers taken directly from japanese art books, as are the translated text descriptions. In fact, many of the numbers for length and displacement are written in english within the original japanese publications, so I can confirm they are 100% accurate. And like I said above, not even the Macross Compendium has yet translated these source materials, which is why they are not on that site (a rare example where the M3 has jumped just a little bit ahead of the Compendium). The statistics are official nonetheless; see the following picture...

Exhibit A

You misunderstand which stats are unofficial. The Macross Mecha Manual's text descriptions of all of these ships has material that are not translated from official Japanese material for those ships. They list companies that aren't in the official Japanese material, instead of the ones that are.

Now regarding the Entertainment Bible #51, I've relied upon translation help for that book which I don't own myself. But if you can confirm that certain figures are not official, I'll certainly bring it to the attention of the fans assisting me in translations. However, since you were in error about the recent Macross 7 ships I have to ask that you be more discriminating. We cannot discount figures out of turn just because they may have appeared earlier on old RPG websites. Some RPG figures MAY or MAY NOT be accurate japanese translations and they have to be debunked on a case-by-case basis.

Which is why I've ignored any and all RPG websites in building my siote. The source information (via the Macross Compendium) is the only 100% accurate source we can rely upon. I've used the MC for my site and not used any RPG book or RPG stats in the creation of the Macross Mecha Manual (as far as I'm aware). The offical length of the VF-1 Valkyrie is 14.23 meters; that number appears on my website because it's officially correct, NOT because some RPG website also contains the same figure. It's important to understand the difference.

Unfortunately, the Macross Mecha Manual does have RPG stats that aren't from official Japanese sources, and even mistakenly credits them as coming from official Japanese sources. For example, the Macross Mecha Manual lists the VF-2SS as "Fighter Mode: wingspan variable 7.9 meter to 12.2 meters; height 5.2 meters; length 15.8 meters" and claims this is "Translated information taken from Entertainment Bible #51." These are all RPG stats and not listed in Entertainment Bible #51.

The Macross Frontier section is ovbiously a continual work-in-progress, so it's understandably incomplete and filled with some basic information only (and speculations are indicated as such). The recent Macross 7 additions were translated from official japanese books. The Macross II information was taken from the Entertainment Bible #51. I'm not sure what you're referring to specifically, but if you can assist in the translations or debate the accuracy, that would be a big help.

The problem with the Macross Frontier section is not that its incomplete, but it adds text that aren't in the official material. For example, the Macross Quarter copies in speculative material from the separate New Macross Class. The same goes for the Macross 7 additions--all the power/engine stats are incorrect or not from official sources. The Macross II information are not all taken from the Entertainment Bible #51, even though many of the stats are mistakenly attributed to that book. For example, the VF-2SS section has stats that are specifically but mistakenly credited to that book ("Translated information taken from Entertainment Bible #51"), when that book doesn't have those stats at all. They actually come from the flawed American RPG stats.

I assure you Mr March checks his info very carefully he gets his specs from the official materials.

It's also important to note that there are official statistics and texts now included on the M3 that previously had no english translations. These were part of the last major update and include most of the Macross 7 fleet ships (Einstein, Hollywood, Mark Twain, Three Star, West Point) as well as all of the Macross II section. Very special thanks go out to Macross World members cyde01 and Seto Kaiba for translating and obtaining translations for these profiles.

At least in the case of the recent Macross 7, Macross Frontier, and Macross II additions, there are specs that are not from the Compendium or the official Japanese materials, but are not disinguished as such. In fact, some of the specs are misattributed to Japanese sources when they are not in the sources. Like Mr. March said earlier, this is an unofficial website. The trouble is that unofficial stats are mixed in with official stats, and are not properly distinguished.

Lots of nice specs and images for the mecha in the macross universe that you won't get from compendium.

Lots of great fan-colored images, but be careful on relying on the non-Compendium specs. Those non-Compendium specs has the same issues as those in mahq.net--they often fill in blanks in official materials with fan-invented or incorrect info.

Well, this could be an interesting development:

A finished Megahouse Cyclone/Mospaeda in the Toynami Toyfair display

http://toyfair08.asmzine.com/gallery/toyna...s/IMG_0032.html

You can see that's the MH box:

http://www.megahobby.jp/special/scoop2.html

Link to the gallery (thanks to Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0)

http://macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?s=&a...st&p=562533

It looks like that website made a mistake. The same website also put Hasbro's Transformers under "Toynami."

http://toyfair08.asmzine.com/gallery/toynami/index2.html

I'm with you on this one. Aside from reissuing the old model kits, we've never seen anything done to celebrate Mospeada's 10th, 15th, or 20th anniversaries.

There have been LD and DVD releases between those anniversaries.

One theory I have is that perhaps Toynami's MPC Alphas have been selling well enough on Yahoo Japan to spark an interest in making new toys.

Except they haven't been. For the past year (even before the CM's and Aoshima announcements), there have been Toynami MPCs sitting unsold and repeatedly resolicited on Yahoo Japan. The only model that's generating any sustainable interest is the Shadow (because there were no Dark Legioss toys in the 1980s). Even then, neither CM's nor Aoshima has planned Dark Legioss toys.

Or maybe Japan is experiencing an anime "retro" phase, kind of like how America was with Speed Racer in the mid 90's.

That's the real reason. Look at all those other 1980s robot shows that never got an American release and never got any toys for twenty years in Japan, only to get three or four companies selling toys in the last five years. Lots of 1980s kids in Japan are reliving their childhood instead of saving for retirement.

I agree, afterall, if this were 25th anniversary fever wouldn't all this merchandise be slated to come out in 2008 to really celebrate it?

Look at Macross. There were toys and models with the official 20th Anniversary logo in 2001, a year before the actual anniversary. Look at Gundam. There were toys and models with the official 20th Anniversary logo almost two years before 1999.

I think Tatsunoko is probably trying to ramp up some renewed interest in Mospeada and [conspiracy] then release Shadow Chronicles in some heavily revamped form as Mospeada II. Then again, perhaps "Mospeada II" will be the big 25th anniversary celebration event... [/conspiracy].

Vifam, Orguss, Galient, Gold Lightan, and more are all getting toys near their 25th anniversary after a two-decade drought, but it's not because of new animation. It's just that poor 1980s kids are now 2000s salarymen with disposable income for toys.

Count me in the camp wondering "why" all this Mospeada all of a sudden... I mean, this feels like the '80s again when every hollywood studio put out an underwater movie (The Abyss, Deep Star Six, Leviathan, etc...) out of nowhere. I mean, yes I am thrilled that this old obscure property is getting some treatment outside of Toynami but it just strikes me as strange that it is getting so much focus NOW.

Still with the "tidal wave" of Japanese fan interest we've had for Mospeada in the past 25 years I'm shocked so much is being done by so many for what pretty much amounts to a little known anniversary for a little followed show. It just strikes me as strange that even for a "25th Anniversary" that so many different companies are moving on Mospeada products. CM's, Beagle, Aoshima... all making transforming toys, not just cheapie plastic figurines or claw game prizes.

I know it's easy for those of us who are fans of the show to say "well DUH the show is awesome and it's totally popular in Japan" but IMHO that sort of doesn't ring true. I mean, one short show with it's last showing being a single episode OAV spinoff that came out 21 years ago is not exactly fresh in the minds of Japanese fandom. About the only thing that kept the show alive this long was it's inclusion in Robotech. I'm not trying to get into a Mospeada fandom debate (even though it might seem that I am), I'm just trying to figure out where this big push is coming from...

Okay, we have an old obscure 1983 real robot property that didn't even last one year, with a spinoff that was ignored by everyone except the diehard fans. There was nothing besides model kits and videos for over twenty years, and then suddenly we have toys (not models, but prebuilt figures) from no less than three different companies, including CM's. Why? Well, obviously, it must be that American remake of...

Wait. American remake of Round Vernian Vifam? There was no American remake of Vifam. And yet, look at all the recent toys for this obscure 1983 real robot property:

http://www.hlj.com/scripts/hljlist.cgi?x=0...is=-2&Code=

Don't let your myopia of anything unrelated to Robotech in Japan fool you. It's not just Mospeada. Mospeada is only getting the same old treatment that several other obscure 1980s robot shows are getting in the last five years. More than a dozen 1980s robot shows have finally gotten toys after about two decades of just model reissues (if that). Look at 1983's Orguss. Look at 1984's Galient. Look at 1985's Layzner. Look at 1987's Bubble Gum Crisis. Look at 1985's Megazone 23. (Suuure, it must be that Robotech movie that's getting Japanese Megazone fans all hot and bothered about toys...) Look at friggin' Gold Lightan.

http://www.hlj.com/scripts/hljlist.cgi?x=0...is=-2&Code=

http://www.hlj.com/scripts/hljlist.cgi?x=0...is=-2&Code=

http://www.hlj.com/scripts/hljlist.cgi?x=0...is=-2&Code=

http://www.hlj.com/scripts/hljlist.cgi?x=0...is=-2&Code=

http://www.hlj.com/hljlist2/?range=descrip...p;GenreCode=All

http://www.hlj.com/hljlist2/?range=descrip...p;GenreCode=All

[state the Obvious] I wonder if this has anything to do with Shadow Chronicles? [/state the Obvious]

As SaveRobotech pointed out, the director of Beagle--the company making the Japanese 1/12 Mospeada toys--admitted his company wasn't even aware of Robotech: The Shadow Chronicles. The company is just made of Mospeada fans, who know that there is small but loyal following for Mospeada in Japan, just like there are for dozens of other 1980s robot shows.

http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?...st&p=478161

as much as I'd like to believe "25th Anniversary", my brain is telling me more that Shadow Chronicles has possible renewed interest in the designs from the show. The 25th Anniversary seems like a coincidence... either that or Shadow Chronicles hitting right at the anniversary.

Remember, Harmony Gold didn't plan on releasing the Shadow Chronicles in 2007, one year before Mospeada's 25th anniversary. It was just that HG slipped its deadline of 2005 (Robotech's 20th anniversary) by two years. It's Shadow Chronicles' timing that's accidental.

yup. kawamori did the original diaclone line, but the stuff that looks like real world vehicles was done by this guy: Ohno Koujin, including the original starscream with the blue boxing glove hands.

Actually, there are two books that confirm that Shoji Kawamori worked on the "real world vehicles" of Diaclone as well. Those two books confirm that he co-designed Diaclone's Battle Convoy (Optimus Prime) and Fairlady Z (Bluestreak/Streak/Silverstreak and Prowl), and also state that he worked on several other designs after Diaclone went "real." On the Fairlady Z, he did the original design, and Ohno drafted it into a mechanically and commercially feasible toy. Here are those two books:

http://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/product/4063300862

http://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/product/4861760364

As for me, I can read, speak and write Japanese 85% fluently and Oihan is right with that katakana writing of the Marduk

392766[/snapback]

Just to clarify, you meant my katakana writing of Mardook and Gigamesh, right? No one else in this thread used katakana.

I just wanted to add/mention the subtitles too on the Macross II DVD. 

392716[/snapback]

And as mentioned above, Manga's Macross II subtitles are wrong in this case, compared to Bandai Visual's Macross II DVDs and the actual spoken dialogue on both.

Subtitles are not perfect, and it's wise not to assume so.

Okay, for starters, nice references and kudos on the Japanese lesson, but I think it might've been a little easier on everyone to provide the Wikipedia articles in english, since I'm not entirely sure how many of us actually read Japanese fluently, much less at all.

Yeah, well, we're talking about indirect homages to Japanese pronunciations of myths originally written in Sumerian, so the English Wikipedia isn't much help. The best that the English Wikipedia can do is link us to the Japanese article:

English Wikipedia article

See "in other languages" section in the left column which goes to:

Japanese Wikipedia article

The bottom line is that the mythical Marduk is written one way, but Mardook in Macross II is written another way.

There's a reason that the accepted spelling is used a lot more often than the official one. It's strictly a matter of pronunciation. People don't feel comfortable groping around at words with strange spellings, so opting for something that is already at least moderately used in the English language makes it that much easier for people to muddle their way through the pronunciation. Take that and the fact that "Marduk" and "Mardook" sound virtually identical when spoken, and you've got pretty good reason for people remembering the common spelling more than the official one.

That may be a reason for using the wrong spelling at first, but not a good reason for hanging onto it once told of the official spelling. It's definitely not a reason to "correct" someone who was already using the official spelling by telling that person the wrong spelling instead--as one did in replying to the very first post on this thread.

It's also used that way on the vast majority of the websites that deal with Macross II, because of the prevalence of the Macross II RPG, which used the "Marduk" spelling.

Since when did an out-of-print overseas RPG carry more weight than Bandai Visual and the Macross II creators themselves? That's even further from the source than Manga Entertainment's release, which is already wrong in this particular instance.

Still, since they changed the spelling/pronunciation of "Marduk" and "Gilgamesh" it does lead you to wonder why the other major Babylonian reference, "Ishtar" got through relatively unscathed.

It's similar to how Jenius and Macross are spelled (and, likewise, pronounced) differently from their inspirations ("genius" and "Macbeth"), but Global is spelled like the English terms "global"--it's fine to have one direct homage, but three or even more direct homages might be pushing the suspense of disbelief.