Talk:Kit Kat/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Info Needed

I agree completely about having a complete list of Kit Kats. The list that was deleted in 2007 was the only one of its type. Now we have a lot of the new varieties but are missing many of the earlier ones. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.240.121.1 (talk) 21:57, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

You know what would be really good? If someone added a massive list detailing all the different types of Kit Kats. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.3.186.10 (talk) 12:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

This page had a nearly complete list in 2007 but someone in their ultimate wisdom decided to delete those Kit Kats that were limited or short lived. Read the sections below to see the discussion. I agree -- BRING THE COMPLETE LIST BACK! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.240.121.1 (talk) 17:10, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I am very keen to find a reference for the following statement which opens the article - "The original four-finger version of this chocolate-covered biscuit bar was developed after a worker at the Rowntree's factory in York put a suggestion in the suggestion box for a snack that a 'man could have in his lunch box for work'."

I don't dispute the statement at all as I believe I read the same thing elsewhere, however, I can't remember where I read it. I'm currently writing an essay on the brand and would appreciate help tracking down the source. In exchange I can offer to add more to the entry on the history of the brand using verifiable sources that I have tracked down. - Geek for History —Preceding


Buh wATS the slogan ?

unsigned comment added by Geek for History (talkcontribs) 09:56, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

The Foil

Does anyone know when KitKat got rid of their foil wrapping with paper sleeve. That wrapping was great! Sliding your nail up the groove before snapping the finger off? Marvellous. That packet-type affair they have now is all wrong. Rob 19:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC) I know! You're right man...I'm only 14 but my mom told me about those and they sound fun. My childhood is messed. JK. --DancexwithxmexXx 17:45, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

They still had these as of last year in India. I remember doing this because it's one of my favourite things to do before actually eating the chocolate. I haven't had it since then though. Roshangeorge (talk) 12:32, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Here in the UK, they still use the foil and paper sleeve packaging 18:28, 11 January 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.21.225.95 (talk)

Blizzard

The Blizzard at Dairy Queen is, at best, mediocre. And if you really feel you have to waste your money on it then at least get the small. --DancexwithxmexXx 17:45, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Does that really have anything to do with Kit Kats? Ian.bjorn (talk) 21:32, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Boycott

Just this past year, KitKat was targeted for a boycott by Greenpeace for being (indirectly) responsible for the destruction of forest habitats for orangutans in Indonesia. Several youtube videos went "viral", and I believe Nestle agreed to Greenpeace terms, finding a more acceptable distributor for the oil to settle the matter. That should probably belong, as it was well covered in the news. --Axcelis555 (talk) 16:00, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

The videos were linked to from the article on numerous occasions but were deleted because no one provided links to any reliable secondary sources talking about the issue. If you've got good sources (especially Kit Kat capitulating) then by all means add it to the article. SQGibbon (talk) 16:40, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
OK, gave it a shot --Axcelis555 (talk) 10:17, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Gallery of wrappers

I scanned and added another 11 examples of Japanese packaging but my scanner didn't do a great job. If anyone has any more, let's add them and build up the gallery. Zenpea 22:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I have wrappers! I don't know why, but can I scan them and add them to the gallery? I have red berry, caramac, rich golden caramel, mango and passionfruit, and orange kubes. Sweetie Petie 18:46, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Of course you can - no-one owns the article. I suppose the only requirement is that they match the others in terms of pixel width and style. zenpea 03:08, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Yay, I'm all excited now! I love Kit Kats ;) Sweetie Petie 08:22, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

General

The list of Kit Kats needs organising, either chronologically (perhaps impossible), alphabetically (easiest), by region (potential overlap), or some other method. Kit Kat Chunky, Kit Kat Kubes, Kit Kat Editions and Kit Kat Stick could possibly be separated out with flavour variations listed. Japan's Kit Kat Petit also came in various flavours (original, strawberry, green tea, gold etc.) Other variants with no subsequent flavour variations might also be separated, such as the UK's 5-bar Kit Kats etc. etc. Anyway, I have no particular feelings on all this and don't really want to embark on organising the Kit Kats without prior discussion. But they need sorting out.

I added more trivia and some advertising history. I also removed the theory that the name might come from the sound of breaking the wrapper ('kit') and then breaking the bar ('kat') - the bar didn't get its characteristic snap until the late 1950s. I also removed some rather unnecessary US focus - Kit Kat is not a US confection and there is little interesting about the US Kit Kats other than that they are made by Hershey (and taste 'different', to put it politely). Anyway, such a fact on its own probably does not need to be registered in the opening paragraph of an encyclopaedia entry any more than the existence of the three-bar Arabian Kit Kats or the special chocolate used to stop the ones in Malaysia from melting. Zenpea 20:55, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I reorganized the list several months ago, grouping them mostly by type (standard size finger types, then Chunky bars, etc) with the more obscure (and probably unpopular) types last. Even if it were possible, organizing them chronologically or by region would be a mess, as some varieties are released at different times in different parts of the world and I think including the dates and years may be a bit too much. If the list were too technical then I suppose we would have to list all varieties of King Size, petit, mini bars, miniatures, etc. and the differences in some of the flavored Kit Kats i.e. use of flavored creme in Japan vs. use of flavoring in the chocolate elsewhere in the world. That would probably be more information than most people would care to know! I considered sorting them alphabetically but then the problem will exist that some of the variants of mint and strawberry will be all over the place so I grouped like variants together for the most part. I like the list as is - it is simple and just points out the unique flavors and distinct varieties of bars. I agree that the types probably should be separated and sorted a little better.
I don't think the US focus should be ignored or dismissed. Technically the Kit Kat isn't British anymore (Nestlé is a Swiss company) and most of its recent growth can be attributed to Nestlé's push to spread it throughout the non-English speaking world. The US is the largest market for confections in the world. Hershey has been one of the most innovative companies in this industry and the new variants of the US Kit Kat have been a part of that. Hershey competes with Nestlé on a global scale too, so there should no doubt that they pay attention to each other's developments and ideas. Opinions on taste aside (though I prefer the UK Kit Kat myself, I personally don't have a problem with the sweeter taste of the US Kit Kat), I think we can agree that what makes this confection special is both the subtle and unique differences in its many forms available throughout the world. --Chocoholic1 03:24, 31 December 2005 (UTC)


I agree regarding the issues you mention on organising the list of Kit Kats. But currently, although the list is very comprehensive and has the merits you point out, it strikes me as somewhat unreadable. In particular, I couldn't identify whether certain variants weren't on the list without searching for them, which I thought may deter other people from updating it. All the points you mention are well made though, so I'm a little at a loss. Perhaps in the future a great idea will wiggle through the fog of confusion and birth itself before us.

As for the US stuff: Nestlé being Swiss is a little beside the point because Rowntree, at least, was British and they invented the product. That fact doesn't change just because Nestlé bought the company. And whilst Hershey is no doubt an important global player and there are a lot of Americans who buy candy, I can't see that it makes headline news when charting the waters of Kit Kat's evolution to its current state - firstly, Cadbury's challenge had more of a direct influence on marketing and positioning, (as I think you or someone else already noted), and secondly, wouldn't Japan, rather than the US, take the biscuit when it comes to variation (if you'll excuse the pun)? All that is not to say the Hershey's stuff isn't important - but it did make me think that it was somewhat arbitrary to single out the US for specific mention in the opening paragraph. If the argument were just to be based on Kit Kat's particularly notable sales or market share in the US, then perhaps it would benefit from some figures.

That all said, you're very much correct in what we can agree on. Going abroad and dunking a bizarrely flavoured Kit Kat in my tea never fails to entertain! Zenpea 17:49, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I believe there are several reasons the Hershey reference is not out of place in the opening paragraph: The page itself is linked under the categories of candy bars, Hershey brands and Nestlé brands. Right or wrong, ignorant or not, most Americans believe the Kit Kat is a American creation so mentioning it early in the article doesn't detract from the history or significance of it really being Nestlé's. You are right that sales figures could be mentioned so I will move that stuff from the trivia to the intro of the article. To be honest, I think the page has a much better balance than before I started adding to it. I first started adding and correcting the page on August 16, 2005. All the changes under the IP addresses 67.53.x.x and 206.197.x.x are from me and I have tried to give the page more info and trivia from its UK roots. Before that it was obvious the page was devoid of distinct British or Nestlé Rowntree references. Even the sole ingredient list was from the US verision but it was not noted as such. Also, many variants were missing or incorrect and I believe I have cleaned most of them up and filled in the blanks, so to speak.
I think I'll start by separating the list into standard Kit Kat variants and Chunky variants and see how that looks. Within the groups we can probably sort them by Original, White and Dark variants, then mint, fruity and finally other flavors. I really think having the years of release in there is just too messy and not of interest to most people. Likewise, listing the petits when their flavors were already previously listed is too much. In cases when the variants were only available as petits or mini bars etc. that should be noted. --Chocoholic1 07:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, I take the point that the article is listed under Hershey and Nestlé, but I still can't quite grasp why American opinion has any bearing on historical development or on the order of the article (insofar as this isn't a US encyclopaedia). The common root to all Kit Kats is Rowntrees in York, so surely that has to be the first bit of information, and it seems quite natural to follow that with a description of the bar and a history of the name. Once one has the basic thing described and introduced, one can start talking about what happens to it and why it's interesting and how it came to be produced by a different company in the US. That's the story I'd tell. But if you feel Hershey needs to be front and centre then I won't lose any sleep over it, so feel free to edit as you think best. All this isn't meant to be a criticism of what you'd done, just a non-US perspective.
Anyway, I think you did a cracking job adding information - I hope I hadn't implied otherwise. I didn't look at the page until December, and the large amount of info you'd provided made me want to add to it. Today I just made some minor grammatical edits (to my trivia bits) and reorganised it to put relevant sections together. I agree about your comments regarding quantity of information in the list of varieties - the only reason I'd added those petits was because I remembered I still have boxes of them somewhere which I was going to scan eventually. But I agree they really don't need listing and can remain off. -- Zenpea 23:32, 13 January 2006 (UTC)


That sounds better. The variety part is kind of a mess to wade through at the moment. Though I did try thr Lime one when it was out here...bleh, it was gross. A bit like that purple exploding green-jelly-filled 'chocolate' they (don't know who!!) had out in 1999, only I could eat the latter. Lady BlahDeBlah 20:10, 13 January 2006 (UTC)


I agree, Hershey does not need to be front and center, just mentioned early in the article; so that is why I now placed the reference in the 4th paragraph. I think it's appropriate at that point and does not give the article an unfair bias or tilt.
Agree that Hershey shouldnt have all the credit for the bar, so taken out Hershey brands from the list as they are just have the license. Someone should redo the Hershey list and put Kit Kat with Cadbury's products User:DJ HEAVEN
Thanks for organizing your trivia bits but I think you need to go a step further and reword or rewrite some of them as they seem to be copied word for word off of Nestlé websites!
Finally, I think I'm gonna remove the bit from Lady BlahDeBlah about the Kit Kat being used as a straw. While it might be possible, I doubt that it is commonly done and is actually the claim to fame for the Tim Tam and not the Kit Kat. I doubt using a Kit Kit as a straw would be nearly as satisfying as performing a Tim Tam Slam. --Chocoholic1 04:24, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree - whilst it's not uncommon practice here, Cadbury's Fingers are better for it. (I don't think Tim Tams are sold in the UK, or at least I've never seen any.) The trivia bits actually weren't copied off the website, but I'm not surprised if it's similar as I referred to the Kit Kat fact sheet Nestle's PR team send out to the press (which I got about 18 months ago). I don't recall copying any of it verbatim, although I might have done for some bits if there seemed no reason not to. But as it's a press fact sheet, I'm not convinced anything needs rewording unless the points are unclear. Zenpea 21:27, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Phew! just finding a six pack of Strawberry & Cream Kit Kats on my desk after a late night's work, and having the chance to give them a good teethin' before my kid's get up and start asking questions as to where their "best thing about tommorrow" went, I would like to say that while Kit Kat may be part of the American dream, it's still a british invention and we're proud of it! mmmmmmmh!

information about the famous jingle of Kit Kat added

Hey, this article is improving. I still can't think what to about the list of Kit Kats. My edit was minor disambiguation in the history section. zenpea 06:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey, KitKat Chunky link in product list results in a loop to the start of the page. Does it warrant its own page or should the link be removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.169.242.93 (talk) 15:05, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

KitKat vs. Kit Kat

Finding this article on Wikipedia, I was surprised to read "Kit Kat" rather than the KitKat I have been used to. I searched on the Nestle web sites and found plenty of references to both, so emailed the UK Customer Services department. Their reply to me said:

"We are pleased to confirm that the wording of our brand KitKat is all one word. We will pass your comments regarding our website to the appropriate department."

The UK web site now seems to be more consistent (i.e. KitKat) but I don't know if there are national differences. I would assume not.

Does anyone have any views on whether Wikipedia should be standardised on KitKat? I have added a comment on the main page for now about the difference of opinion.

Philmcgrove 22:33, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Interesting. It still shows up as two words on the US site. (also, strangely, it uses all caps KIT KAT) -SCEhardT 22:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

It's not consistent at all. I moved the comment to trivia and revised it. The UK website uses both the one word and two word references. On the German site it's KITKAT (one word all caps), while on the French, Japanese and Australian sites it's KIT KAT but on the Canadian it's Kit Kat. I believe it is most commonly accepted as two words and as it is supposedly named after the Kit Kat (or Kit Cat) club it should probably stay like that.--Chocoholic1 10:01, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I thought it was KitKat. Just look at all those wrappers. None of them say "Kit Kat". Although on the actual bars pictured at the top of the article, there is a space. I also thought KitKat Chunky was spelled with capital K in ChunKy, as that's how it's written on the wrapper also. Sweetie Petie 11:06, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

You are right about the Chunky bars - I hadn't noticed that before! However the newer wrappers for the Chunky bar (including the peanut butter) have the word Chunky in all caps. I suppose for purposes of the logo and packaging it appears as one word but I would think that is actually gramatically incorrect.--Chocoholic1 03:31, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Ironically, much of Nestlé UK's website uses Kit Kat. You can see it here [1] and here [2] while this page [3] uses both Kit Kat and KitKat. The Canadian website uses only Kit Kat whereas most of the other sites use KIT KAT (though all of Hershey's brands seem to be in all caps on their site). Confused? I know I am.--Chocoholic1 05:55, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I added the following to the global confection section: "However, transliteration is not always in Nestlé's favour - "kitto katto" (where 'katto' is taken to be a katakana transliteration of the English verb 'cut') is understood to bestow Kit Kat with the less positive significance of "you will definitely miss the cut". As such, gifts of a single kit-kat are a running joke for senior high school students taking the University Entrance Examinations in some areas." When I was in Fukuoka a couple of weeks ago, several students from Kyushu University and some other students from a nearby high school in Fukuma told me about this alternative interpretation! Zenpea 22:28, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


Also: [4] this story suggests that Kit Kat 2005-6 UK sales declined by 18%. I don't want to link to it in the article as it's not particularly well written or well-justified, and I'd rather we linked to one that gave more detail about the 18% decline and abandonment of the programme. (I'm also dubious about the claim that the executive was 'abandoned' - I assume this is Chris White. I thought he left voluntarily long before these final-year figures came out.) zenpea 22:58, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

There seem to be a few inaccuracies but this article [5] from the Wall Street Journal is mostly true. While sales initially jumped in 2004, they started falling again in 2005 probably due to too many new varieties on the market at once. The "awful" orange flavored bar had to have been the Seville orange chunky which was discontinued in early 2005. I also have to agree that the Strawberries and Cream was not tasty either. I think it's likely Nestlé knew about these issues before the end of 2005 which probably played a part in Chris White's "removal". It looks like his successor, Paul Grimwood will be taking a more conservative approach and return the Kit Kat to it's roots as he's had the common sense to bring the original 'Have a break..' slogan back.--Chocoholic1 06:39, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Ooh, great. That article is much better than the other one. Glad to hear Nestlé are calming down. Maybe they'll bring Kitty the Kat back one of these days. zenpea 09:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

One other thing - I'm a bit confused about Crispy Monogatari - Monogatari means 'story', as you probably know, so until this special edition with the six horror stories was released, it was confusing as to why the product was called 'Crispy Monogatari' at all. I wonder if it is intended that future monogataris will be bundled with different limited edition books...? Is Crispy Sando actually any different from Crispy Monogatari or did they just change the name? zenpea 09:55, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

The Crispy Sando and Monogatari look and taste exacty the same and both versions that I had were the single box version. I agree, the name Monogatari is an oddity and perhaps you are right and there will be more books in the future. What is even stranger is the Kit Kat Wish Upon A Star. The bar is supposed to commemorate the 5th anniversary of Universal Studios Japan but the song "When You Wish Upon A Star" is synonymous with the Walt Disney Company since it appeared in the movie Pinocchio in 1940.--Chocoholic1 03:29, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

This page makes me hungry! Thinktank

helo

There is, however a third option, it is kit-kat. --92.16.233.155 (talk) 19:38, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Does it matter how it's spelled? It is the exact same candy. Ian.bjorn (talk) 21:35, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup of 7 November 2007

While I was tempted to delete the entire list, I decided that as part of my cleanup of the article, I would remove only the special edition varieties of KitKat (representing over two-thirds the list of 164 line extensions) as being indiscriminate information. The permanent lines, I feel, probably have a place in the article. Temporary or limited edition line extensions are but a marketing tool or may reflect poor sales, so are of importance only to serious KitKat historians. There may be exceptions, which should be written in prose above in marketing or other sections. I have replaced the 115 deleted items with a broad global statement which explains the rationale or strategy of the ltd editions.

Further restructuring involved serious pruning of the trivia section. All the items removed therefrom have been moved to one of two new sections, or to the subsection dealing with the different KitKat varieties. Ohconfucius 07:07, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Many of the lines you have left in are not permanent and this distinction is in any case not well founded; temporary KitKat lines recur, seemingly permenant lines cease, lines have variable length from a few weeks to years, temporary lines reappear in other countries. The current list is no more coherent than the old. This is not a criticism of your list, per se; it's a problem endemic to any attempt to arrange KitKat lines because they are difficult to pin down into a set of homogenous boxes. But that's no reason to just get rid of them -- no other list like the one we had exists of KitKat lines (not even Nestle has one, according to their PR dept.) so it should be preserved at least until someone 'serious' sets up an independent website to catalogue it. I would have said the same for the gallery too. But if it's surprising that there are so many variants, then exposure to the manifold flavours, types, styles and so on is quite justifiable. I don't see why it's any different to e.g. having lists of every single kind of coin ever minted in the UK. Why can we be serious about coins on wikipedia but not KitKats?
Furthermore, I don't think your assumption that the limited edition brands are either marketing tools or represent poor sales is wholly accurate -- it is no less a feature of some markets to have temporary lines as it is to have permanent lines is in the UK. And even if it is right, I fail to see why marketing tools are too trivial to mention, particularly when mention of other marketing tools is maintained, like the Kitto Katsu trick. If a whole article were to be written on the interesting and novel ways KitKat has gone about marketing its products, an appendix table of varieties would be a natural addition. I therefore feel there is little reason to delete the whole list on grounds of indiscriminateness.
In any case, the list and gallery are a lot of information to just wipe clean when there has not been a full discussion of their possible merits. There is no consensus on their lack of value, even if both need work. Zenpea 21:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

As a Kit Kat freak and buyer, I relied on the list of ALL Kit Kats including regional/limited edition ones as a reference source and to find new flavors to hunt down and buy. The list shows the great variety of Kit Kat flavors and reflects the popular (and sometimes unpopular) tastes from around the world. BRING BACK THE LIST!!!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.210.186.215 (talkcontribs) 03:43, 1 December 2007

Nearly a year later and we now have a list of Kit Kats that includes some of the limited editions but not all. So what's it gonna be? List every Kit Kat known (preferred) or just the ones that stay around awhile? If its OK to list every variation of certain collectables (coins, etc) than why not here. This is the only list of its kind on the internet and should be COMPLETE! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.240.121.1 (talk) 17:06, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Filling

I heard from a engineer friend who visited the factory as a consultant that the original filling for KitKats was walnut paste (or something similar) and that this was later replaced filling partly made from the dust collected from the wafers. This is a second hand story, so the details may be wrong, but maybe somebody can confirm this. Zipdude (talk) 12:44, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Kit kats have always had wafer inside them as a filling.--92.16.233.155 (talk) 19:39, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Move to KitKat?

The page referenced as evidence for the alternative spellings (this page) now uses exclusively the one-word form "KitKat"; "Kit Kat" does not appear anywhere. That being so, should this page be moved? I know it's a small thing, but I feel we ought to get these things correct, and Nestlé now seem to have made their mind up! Loganberry (Talk) 00:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The official worldwide Kit Kat website ([6]) uses the two word form. It seems only in the logo does it appear as one word. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chocoholic1 (talkcontribs) 22:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you consider kit-kat.--92.16.233.155 (talk) 19:40, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Ingredients list

I regularly purchase Kit Kats in Canada, and if no one sees any harm in doing so, I will add the list of ingredients for any new Canadian bars. Whoopsi-daises, i forgot to sign it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahodacsek (talkcontribs) 17:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I would welcome the move as many other popular products have their ingredients listed - --93.97.181.187 (talk) 21:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
I assume the ingredients vary from country to country. I bought a friend a KitKat in SE-Asia to demonstrate the good taste I knew from Europe (Germany, UK). It was terrible! Maybe they have to use less chocolate there in favour of hardened fat because of the warmer climate. --Wosch21149 (talk) 13:19, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

KitKat Addiction

There have been a number of health documentaries and also few articles online & offline highlighting NOT chocolate addiction, but KitKat addiction. Maybe someone can highlight this trend. --93.97.181.187 (talk) 21:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Content Dispute

A series of IP addresses, 91.177.196.237, 91.177.198.11, 91.177.214.70 and 91.176.202.100 (appears to be one person), is insisting that the following information be in the article.

Since Nestle took over Kit Kat, many British buyers have stopped buying it. The recipe and wrapping was changed. The appeal of the previous recipe was that it had a clean taste and mature buyers could quite happily have one per day with a cup of tea. The recipe was changed so that it now leaves an aftertaste.
Part of the ritual of Kit Kat involved tracing the foil wrapper to reveal the ridges and lettering. Nestle replaced the foil with plastic wrapping. Not only is it not possible to perform the ritual, the plastic strip running along the length prevents opening in the way the consumer wishes.

The information appears to be the personal opinion of the editor and is unsourced. McGeddon and I have removed the information multiple times. Both of us have left messages for the editor on talk pages and left edit summaries explaining why we are removing the info. The only discussion from the editor that wants the information in the article is that we are vandals for taking it out. Can anyone else weigh in on whether this information belongs in the article? A new name 2008 (talk) 23:02, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Although I agree with the sentiment of what is being added and don't doubt that it is indeed true, that is not the point. This is one person's personal opinion and cannot therefore be added. Should a reliable source be found I for one would like to see it added, but until such time as it is reliably sourced I will continue to remove it. --WebHamster 23:28, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Some of these are basic claims that we could try to source from newspapers or press releases (that the recipe and wrapping were changed at some point, and that UK sales fell; maybe even that these two facts were connected), and some are personal opinions that we could only source if we dug out a magazine columnist waxing nostalgically about them.
I'm sat here eating a two-finger Kit Kat wrapped in old-style foil and paper, so clearly a source would help here. --McGeddon (talk) 09:51, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
This user has now taken to checking my recent contributions and reverting a couple of my edits at random every day (marking them as "vandalism"). I'm not sure what this is supposed to achieve, but it's not any sort of argument for including this material in this article.
Given that the user has checked my edits and is now presumably reading this, perhaps he'd like to join in the conversation? As this section shows, all three editors who have removed the material are open to the idea that it could potentially be sourced. --McGeddon (talk) 09:39, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

The wrapper is still the same here in Scotland.--92.16.233.155 (talk) 19:42, 16 March 2009 (UTC)aka (talk)

Two or four fingers?

According to Rowntree History the origanal KitKat was made only in 2 finger format. The later 4 finger bar was introduced due to public demand for confectionary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Azazelvis (talkcontribs) 10:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Which history is this? According to this Nestle page, the four-fingered version came first. ("This product was developed as a four-finger wafer crisp, initially launched in London and the South East in September 1935") --McGeddon (talk) 09:42, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Three More KitKat Varieties in America

While there are strawberry varieties in other countries, I seem to remember buying Orange (or was it orange and cream?) and Strawberry (or strawberry and cream?) versions of KitKat at my local 7-Eleven. Coffee version, too, if I recall. Can anyone verify? 75.140.80.248 (talk) 17:14, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Kit Kat Chunky on Saddam Husseins person

There is currently no mention of the fact that found on Saddam Hussein's person upon his capture was at least one "Nestle Kit Kat Chunky". This is an interesting fact which is deserving of mention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.9.17.189 (talk) 22:29, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Too lazy to find the right date, but I saw an obvious error.

First line under history: "The origins of the 'Kit Kat' brand go back to 2017 ,"

Somehow, I think that needs to be edited. 1917, perhaps? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.230.217.38 (talk) 01:32, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Locked

OK, I have been bold and locked the page because of all the recent vandalism on it.

The page has been locked for 1 day to IPs and new editors. If the vandalism dies down and you wish the page to be unlocked, then you can file a request at WP:RFPP or post a request on my talk page (if I'm about I'll answer) :)--5 albert square (talk) 23:45, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Japanese vending machines?

Under the Flavours section there's a sentence that reads: "In Japan, Kit Kats are also available in jars that are dispensed from vending machines." Can anyone provide a source for this? I've lived in Japan for around four years and I don't think I've ever seen such a thing. 210.189.164.103 (talk) 04:10, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Too many varieties!

Having looked at this article for the first time, I was surprised by how long the list of varieties is. There are more than 150 different varieties of Kit Kats listed in this article. I'm under the impression that this information may be a tad on the trivial side. Also, a gallery of 37 Kit Kat wrappers seems like a bit much—while it's a good idea to include a few wrappers, 37 seems excessive. I've tagged the article for cleanup. --Brandon Dilbeck 19:37, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Agree, the entire list should be deleted since it doesn't really seem encyclopedic. Hydrogen Iodide 19:54, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree about the gallery, it could be much smaller, however I believe it would be a shame to delete the list of varieties. I believe the list is more a source of reference than trivia and is relevant to the history and diversity of the Kit Kat. I also believe it is one the primary highlights and the article would lose much of its appeal without it. Perhaps the list can be detached from the main article and linked separately but again I think deleting it would be unfortunate as it seems to be the only reference of all the varieties available anywhere. --Chocoholic1 05:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Chocoholic1 that the varieties list should be maintained. Whether in the main article or elsewhere, it does have merit.

I've restored the list of varieties for now as I believe the list is encyclopedic as it is a structured list and is informational and is very relevant to recent Kit Kat history and the phenomena of limited editions that it helped spread in the confectionery and food industry. I don't agree that because the list is long it leans on the trivial side. On the contrary, the success and abundance of different varieties and limited editions is unique among confections and food products and has made these Kit Kats highly celebrated and sought after, thereby making the list a notable reference source. Again, the list can be detached and separated from the main article if the consensus is that it is too much on the main article page. --Chocoholic1 19:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

My view is that the extensive lists add little to the content of the article. The point about the variety of special editions being part of a marketing tactic simply requires a good quality external citation, not a list within the article itself. I have tagged the article for cleanup, but will happily discuss the point before I remove the lists. --Korruski (talk) 13:56, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
And another thing, why do Japan get so many varieties, while Scotland has less than 10? This should be remedied as soon as is possible. drt2012 (talk) 19:17, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
I'd say it was textbook WP:IINFO: "Long and sprawling lists of statistics may be confusing to readers and reduce the readability and neatness of our articles. In addition, articles should contain sufficient explanatory text to put statistics within the article in their proper context for a general reader." - as Korruski says above, if we want to tell the reader about the abundance of varieties and limited editions, it would be much more helpful to the reader to present a source that, in straightforward prose, said that. We shouldn't be handing the reader an unmarked list of a hundred worldwide flavours and asking them to reach their own conclusions about how this range might compare to other chocolate bars, how much it might contribute towards the snack's fame, or how this varies across countries. --McGeddon (talk) 16:22, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and cut it, and added some sourced sentences about the biscuit's popularity in Japan. --McGeddon (talk) 18:04, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
That seems like a misguided and lessening application of policy. Calling a listing of known varieties of Kit Kats "statistics" is odd. There's no attempt to ask the reader to compare to other chocolate bars, it's irrelevant to the snack's fame (but could be used to underscore the cultural importance of the Kit Kat regional gift boxes in Japan), and the variety across countries seems interesting but not directly relevant. The destruction of that interesting and useful list seems uncalled for. I propose to restore it based upon the misapplication of [[WP::IINFO]] on the grounds that it's a useful and interesting listing. The 16:22 proposal to link to some secondary source enumerating this same list would be a viable compromise, with the acknowledgement that a secondary source would be more likely to be static and out of date. Preppy (talk) 18:38, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, there's really no reason to remove the entire list. If it's a matter of bloat, just hide the list - but it's definitely relevant to the history of the candy bar to cover all of its various flavors and forms, even if most of them are just bullet-points. The reason that was cited, "long lists may be confusing to our readers", is laughable in this case. Is someone really going to be confused when they see a list of kit kat flavors that has.... a bunch of flavors? What's potentially confusing about that? "Woah, they totally lost me after we passed 50 flavors, now I have no idea what's going on!" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.193.68.225 (talk) 21:38, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Sources

WhisperToMe (talk) 16:03, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Kit Kat Chanky.jpg Nominated for Deletion

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:Kit Kat Chanky.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Kit Kat Chanky.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:59, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Size of the product

I just bought a Kit Kat from our company's vending machine, the last time I had this product was years ago. For some reason it seems a lot smaller than it used to be, despite being more expensive of course. It now weighs 45 grams in Canada. I would like to see a history of the sizes in grams or ounces of Kit Kat across the years, would be interesting. The Case of the Shrinking Candy Bar!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.164.152.151 (talkcontribs) 18:23, 11 November 2011‎

China

There are no sources for that milk scandal? why not remove it ? Ruffruder0 (talk) 08:52, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Panda ad…?

The article references an ad in which a Giant Panda “take a break”; I’m not aware of this commercial, but do know the one in which a solitary photographer stands outside the panda house in rain and sun, waiting to take a picture, and, pausing to “take a break” and eat a Kit-Kat, he misses entirely a roller-skating dance routine by a pair of pandas, who have returned to the house before the completely unaware photographer turns back to his camera. Is this what is meant, or was there one of a panda taking a break? Don’t know the date of the original (1989?), but the same commercial, with a cutaway to hands opening the current metallic plastic wrapper as opposed to the paper and foil used previoulsy, is being run on UK TV in 2013… Jock123 (talk) 13:39, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

The Panda advert was in 1996 this is currently showing on UK TV Jking88 (talk) 20:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

KitKat, Not Kit Kat?

Why the space between Kit and Kat in this article, when, as the illustrations show, the product is called KitKat, one word, no space? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.197.139.41 (talk) 05:34, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

- I think the anonymous poster has a point Unibond (talk) 23:43, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Nestlé themselves mostly use "Kit Kat" on their site, "KitKat" can be found, but less frequent.
  • Kit Kat: Explaining the history of the brand: [7], [8], [9]: "Have a break, have a Kit Kat.(R)", Kit Kat Fact Sheet: [10]
  • KitKat: [11]. Headline: "KitKat", text: "Have a break, have a KitKat."
--Wosch21149 (talk) 22:11, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

"In Japan, ..."

Please make a Japan section instead of saying In Japan several times. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.143.103.173 (talk) 18:06, 6 August 2014 (UTC)