Talk:St. Elmo's Fire (film)

message: The 1985 brat pack movie St. Elmo's Fire was a defining movie of that genre.
Can someone enlighten us as to why? Mike H 06:57, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
I'm planning on adding a detailed synopsis of this film, and a section on its crtical reviews and its place in popular culture at the time.
The Machine 15:38, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "Defining 80s movie?"

message: The bar is actually only called "St. Elmo's," not "St. Elmo's Fire" (which would really be overkill, between the title of the movie, the song playing in the background and the allusion to the natural phenomenon in the climactic scene!) Change has been made. -J21
:The bar has two names, "St. Elmo's Bar" (lit-up sign) and "Saint Elmo's Bar" (printed on awning). They are both visible during the closing credits. --Cinematical 05:55, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The name of the bar

message: Please merge relevant content, if any, from [ Alec Newbary] per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alec Newbary.   (If there is nothing to merge, just leave it as a redirect.)  Thanks. —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-11 09:40Z
Any material that is truly encyclopedic from any articles on the individual characters should be brought into this article, and then the character articles should be deleted or redirected. HokieRNB 17:30, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added a merge template, which should not be removed without discussion here.  The articles on individual characters are not encyclopedic and should be greatly pared down and merged into the existing article here.  In addition, the plot summary needs to be vastly edited. HokieRNB 22:57, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the characters should not have their own articles. --Cinematical 05:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done There really wasn't anything to merge, as the individual articles mostly duplicated the content of the main article. They are now all redirects. -- Gyrofrog  (talk) 19:17, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge from [[Alec Newbary]]

message: :File:St elmo's fire.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for File:St elmo's fire.jpg

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:09, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject class rating

message: I'm going to change the order of themes section so it matches the "main character" section. Possibly other slight grammatical corrections - no content changes without notes first--Legomancer (talk) 08:51, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Minor Edits

message: Where 'da plot man?  Typically movie entries tell you a bit more than one sentence about what the plot is. Wjhonson (talk) 20:06, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Plot

message: def not; its characters are fully adult college grads, lawyers, social workers, married w/children, etc. 63.142.146.194 (talk) 04:57, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "coming-of-age film" 

message: The article renders it as Newbury. The subtitles on my DVD (both English and German) spell it Newberry. Are there any sources for Newbury? -- UKoch (talk) 12:53, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have changed the spelling. -- UKoch (talk) 15:35, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alec's last name 

message: Why are critic scores from Rotten Tomatoes taken seriously? Several of those "reviews" are just personal websites and it's pretty well established that RT has a very low bar for giving someone a critic account. 
If we're going to use that, then there's no reason to not include the audience score unless someone can prove rampant review bombing. For St. Elmo's Fire, the audience score is 67% fresh, with a 3.7/5 average on over 50,000 reviews. That, coupled with the movie's box office success, is far more relevant to how it was received than a handful (45) critic reviews that include quite a few clearly amateur blogger caliber entries. TheJoeGreene (talk) 05:12, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have concerns about the use of RT in general, your concerns would be better raised at WT:FILM. If you have concerns about the reviews of this film in particular, can you please more clearly elucidate your concerns with how RT scored this film in particular? Can you point to examples of which critic reviews you feel compromise the RT score? DonIago (talk) 06:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rotten Tomato Critics