Talk:List of chocolate bar brands

Hostess Kazabars

Recently, I can across an article from earlier this year (which you see here) that said Hostess has come out with a new cake called Kazabars. The article says: "It contains layers of chocolate cake, crème, crunchy candy bits, and either caramel or chocolate fudge, coated in an exterior layer of more chocolate." One would think it would qualify as a chocolate bar. Thoughts? Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 00:31, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

After buying - and eating - a box of Kazabars they are definitely in the snack cake category from my experience. If the consistency of the cake portion (which is the larger percentage of the snack) was closer to a dense brownie I could be convinced candy bar is a better description. Also, since Hostess themselves terms them a snack cake, that is indeed what they are in my mind. Thanks for asking the question. Hopefully more opinions will be offered. THX1136 (talk) 02:23, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Chocolate content

I have read the "inclusion criteria" discussion above but did not see anything on "percent chocolate content". I raise this point because I recently ate a Churro flavored Kit Kat which is listed in the table, but it contains "less than 2% chocolate" and is certainly not "enrobed in milk chocolate" as described in the table. Here are the ingredients as listed on the Churro Kit Kat wrapper with bold text added:

Sugar, vegetable oil (palm oil, shea oil, sunflower oil, palm kernel oil, &/or safflower oil), wheat flour, skim milk, corn syrup solids, lactose (milk), contains 2% or less of: chocolate, lecithin (soy), natural & artificial flavor, artificial color (yellow 6 lake, yellow 5 lake, blue 2 lake, red 40 lake), pgpr, salt, yeast, baking soda.

Question: Does Churro flavored Kit Kat qualify for listing as a chocolate bar? Woodlot (talk) 12:32, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@Woodlot, this was never factored into the discussion. Most chocolate bars are covered in chocolate while some have chocolate throughout the bar. That number denotes how much of the chocolate bar is made of actual cacao bean product. Here is a good article on the different types of chocolate and this article talks about the regulations for milk and white chocolate. In the United States, it has to contain a minimum of 10 percent cacao mass. 10 percent in the United States means sweeter chocolate. In the EU, the first article says it has to contain a minimum of 25 percent cacao while the second article says 35 percent. The higher percentage in Europe means less sugar. In Canada, it's 25 percent.

The second article says the FDA regulates white chocolate in the United States at 20 percent. The rest of the world that regulates chocolate follow the 20 percent cocoa butter regulation. Hong Kong is the only place that doesn't regulate chocolate. They regulate the ingredients that go into chocolate not the chocolate itself. With that being said, 10 percent would have to be the minimum for inclusion for milk chocolate and that includes Hong Kong.

A page notice with no expiry would be very handy to have. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 00:21, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

I would go for the 10% because I don't think any country has a rate below 10%. I think we can agree that at least 2% is not chocolate. Coldbolt (talk) 17:58, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Coldbolt, it's going to be a big task, but we'll have to go through all the entries and see what should be removed once this discussion is closed. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 20:06, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the sources. For milk chocolate, I'd like to point out that FDA regulation (10%) is just about cocoa liquor (the term used by the FDA is "chocolate liquor") and not about total cocoa percentage (unlike European and Canadian regulations, both requiring 25% total cocoa solids, of which at least 2.5% non-fat cocoa solids). The FDA lists cocoa butter as an optional ingredient, but other vegetable fats seem not to be allowed. The average milk chocolate tablet contains a fair amount of cocoa butter (often more than cocoa liquor, see this example). So, most brands like Hershey's, Lindt, Milka etc, have about 30% total cocoa ingredients (often confusingly called "cocoa solids" since most people associate them with cocoa powder) in their milk tablets. No big difference between the US and Europe after all. Ok, Cadbury seems to be lower (23% cocoa), with vegetable fats partially replacing cocoa butter.

So, if a combination bar is made with 50% milk chocolate, there is going to be only 15% cocoa ingredients in the bar. And if it is made of 33%, this means only 10% cocoa, and even much less if vegetable fats are present in the milk chocolate! Zach (Talk) 14:41, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I just noticed that we have a page about the legal requirements (Types of chocolate#Legal requirements by country/region). So, like I said, in the United States legal requirements are only about cocoa liquor and not total cocoa ingredients, but cocoa butter (which is really a key ingredient in milk chocolate) cannot be replaced with other vegetable fats. Not surprisingly, it seems that a lot of people are really confused about those requirements, including this BBC article. Zach (Talk) 14:18, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

I think neither Churro flavored Kit Kat nor Zero bar qualify as a chocolate bar. Zach (Talk) 15:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

The former has been established, but you never backed up as to why Zero doesn't qualify. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 01:18, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

They have a similar cocoa percentage (only or less than 2%). Hershey also acknowledges that the Zero bar is not a chocolate bar ("this retro bar offers a break from chocolate") [1]. Zach (Talk) 09:52, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

According to this source [2], to be described as a dark chocolate, a product needs to be at least 43% cocoa solids (including cocoa nibs and cocoa butter). At least 26% of these solids should be cocoa butter. But the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Heath says ([3], dark chocolate contains 50-90% cocoa solids, cocoa butter, and sugar. With that, I would say dark should be a minimum of 43 percent cocoa solids. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 17:05, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Interesting! I checked the French government website ([4]) and there is indeed a minimum of 43% total dry cocoa solids for dark chocolate ("dry" in this context means no humidity to be clear). Now, the subtlety I wasn't aware of, is that there is another legal appellation that is just "chocolate". And it applies to any product with 35% total cocoa. But maybe it is just the French law, I'm not sure. If it also applies in the EU, then there must be a mistake in Types of chocolate. Zach (Talk) 18:06, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

I checked the EU website ([5]). Curiously it says nothing about "dark chocolate" but it says:

"5. The sales names "chocolate", "milk chocolate" and "couverture chocolate" specified in Annex I may be supplemented by information or descriptions relating to quality criteria provided that the products contain:

- in the case of chocolate, not less than 43 % total dry cocoa solids, including not less than 26 % cocoa butter,

- in the case of milk chocolate, not less than 30 % total dry cocoa solids and not less than 18 % dry milk solids..."

If I understand this properly, at 43% cocoa solids you are free to use any word that sounds good, like "dark", "quality" etc. on your product. Zach (Talk) 18:32, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

I had a better look a the French website, "dark" is indeed described as a quality criterion rather than a type of chocolate. Same for "Extra", which is commonly used for milk chocolate over 30%. Well, thanks to you, I learned something today. Zach (Talk) 18:54, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Inclusion criteria, again

So, discussion on this from like a year ago, didn't really reach a clear consensus, AfD isn't really the right place for this. Does anyone want to give a go as to what the options actually are? I'm going to go BOLDly remove from the lead "variants", though I don't intend to make any changes to the actual list unless actual positive consensus arises to make those removals there as well. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:06, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your help (and bringing back the topic). Regardless if we list variants or not, what do you think we should do with unsourced entries? We have currently nearly 800 items and only 40 reliable sources, so about 95% of the list is pretty much unsourced stuff that have been there for a while, or worse, added when the list was already tagged (well, a bit less than 95% if blue links are considered sufficient). Although I probably should, I don't think I'm going to tag every unsourced/red-link entry with "citation needed" before deleting them. And I'm pretty sure they are going to remain essentially unsourced ...whether or not I tag them. Zach (Talk) 15:27, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

@Zacharie Grossen, you don't need to tag each one. There is a tag at the top. Adding them to every listing will just end up getting reverted. A better use of your time is helping find sources. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 17:09, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Well, I feel much more motivated now (to say the least!). I will see what I can do. Glad to see that you seem to be ok with the removal of variants. Zach (Talk) 17:48, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

I think to begin with anything that doesn't have an article and doesn't even have a reference to show it even exists should be removed. Unless someone objects, I'm going to start doing that now. Valereee (talk) 11:47, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

That would be fair. On my part, I will try to replace commercial web links. Zach (Talk) 17:49, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

That would be helpful. If you also want to edit the tables themselves, feel free, I'm planning to start with the beginning of the alphabet and work on them over a period. Valereee (talk) 15:30, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Definition of chocolate bar

Seems like certain criteria are needed for what constitutes a "chocolate bar", and chocolate or cocoa content should be one of those criteria. However, determining the chocolate content as a criterion for inclusion in the article may not be possible for all "chocolate bars". For example, I tend to think of the Baby Ruth bar as chocolate; yet, when viewing the "Ingredients" on the wrapper, I see that chocolate (Cocoa) is rather far down on the list which implies decreasing content of cocoa relative to other ingredients, with no percentage given for actual cocoa content.

Baby Ruth Ingredients:

Sugar, roasted peanuts, corn syrup, hydrogenated palm kernel and coconut oil, nonfat milk, high fructose corn syrup, cocoa, and less than 1% of glycerin, dextrose, whey, salt, artificial and natural flavors, soy lecithin, soybean oil, carrageenan, TBHQ and citric acid (to preserve freshness), lactic acid esters. CONTAINS: Peanut, milk and soy ingredients.

Similarly, I consider a Heath bar to be a chocolate bar; but in fact, it contains 2% or less chocolate & cocoa, according to ingredients listed on the wrapper.

Heath Bar ingredients:

Sugar, vegetable oil (palm oil, shea oil, sunflower oil, &/or safflower oil), dairy butter (milk), almonds, lactose (milk), reduced protein whey (milk), Contains 2% or less of: chocolate, skim milk, cocoa, cocoa processed with alkali, salt, lecithin (soy), natural flavor. Contains: Almonds, Milk, Soy. Gluten Free.

I noticed that Mr. C.C. deleted "Gold Brick egg" from the list, not because it lacks chocolate, but because of its egg-shape. Puzzling, when inclusion criteria in the header for the article specifically states: "... A chocolate bar, also known as a candy bar in American English, is a confection in an oblong or rectangular form..." Not trying to be nitpicky, but most egg shapes are oblong, and the two terms are often used interchangeably in common speech.

In the end, inclusion of a "Candy Bar" on a list of "Chocolate Bars" may come down to Justice Potter Stewart's standard for defining obscenity – I know it when I see it, but using that standard here would seem to violate Wikipedia's policy of No original research. Woodlot (talk) 14:19, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Baby Ruth is a good example. To be frank, I'm not sure if inclusion criteria based on cocoa content are really a good idea. I would have said yes a few years ago but now... Zach (Talk) 18:37, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Regarding shape: I would say that what we essentially have here is chocolate products made in a way so that they can be conveniently consumed. So they are not like thick blocks, nor too "weirdly" shaped like Easter bunnies. They also must be larger than a chocolate, that is, a one bite-sized chocolate item. So at the end, it is probably more about being (somewhat) flat than being oblong. Zach (Talk) 17:58, 10 November 2023 (UTC)