This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
I don't think the blurb on Reese's variations belongs here. The variants are already covered in Reese's Peanut Butter Cup.
Jax184 13:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Warning: Reese's Pieces are NOT Peanut Butter Cups![edit]
This is absolutely ridiculous and unacceptable. Reese's Pieces have always been subpar candies in comparison with any Reese Peanut Butter Cups. I've always resented that Pieces were allowed to run with the Reese banner since the product is so inferior. NWO-Wolfpac 03:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the list of Reese's candy from the page because it doesn't belong here, but rather at Reese's Peanut Butter Cup. — Saxifrage✎ 18:10, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No need for this separate stub article - Reese's covers the topic quite well. Can add a sentence about Palmer and be done with it. Tvoz|talk 22:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reese's Peanut Butter Cups and Peanut Butter Cups are two different things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.45.166.232 (talk) 01:55, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Two seperate articles would be obsurd. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.223.12.203 (talk) 16:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]