Talk:Accounting/Archive 1

message: shouldnt the basic accounting formula ASSETS=LIABILITY+OWNERS EQUITY be included?--Enrichyourmind 01:56, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it is already included under financial accounting — Kortaggio Proclamations Declarations 00:12, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accounting Equation 

message: Is here some one explain me the recording, classifying, summarizing and presenting phases of accounting with comprehensive example? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.201.36.155 (talk)  06:28, July 29, 2007
: Have a look at the article Bookkeeping, which I think is what you are looking for. --Gavin Collins 09:49, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phases 

message: A proposal to move Accountancy → Accounting was placed on wikipedia:requested moves and failed.  The discussion follows:
This may well fail, and I apologize in advance if this move turns out to be ill-founded, but as I recall, the word "accounting" is many times more common than "accountancy".  I want to know the usage of these two words.  Peter O. (Talk) 22:30, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)
* Neutral.  This seems to be a case of British English vs American English.  I haven't heard of the term "Accountancy" but if I'm to assume the page is correct, accountancy is the british word, learn something new everyday!  In that case, I'm leaning toward oppose, but I'll wait to see any other comments before I decide for sure.  For a lot these of cases it'd be nice if articles could actually exist at two names instead of having a redirect (but look and be functionally identical, when editing it would note that you're editing all the articles under that title.)  --Sketchee 22:55, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)
* Neutral They're synonyms, however the difference is nuanced. Accountancy: the occupation of maintaining and auditing records and preparing financial reports for a business.  Accounting: The bookkeeping methods involved in making a financial record of business transactions and in the preparation of statements concerning the assets, liabilities, and operating results of a business. (i.e. a "method of accounting" or an "accounting system")  It isn't a matter of British English vs. American English as was erroneously assumed by the author of the article, because accountancy appears in both British and American speech.  It is just that accountancy is more archaic as the vogue of modern speech is using the gerund form to discuss activities or occupations i.e. accounting, or knitting (which used to be knittery until it was dropped out of the dictionary).  As such, "accounting" has become used more and more as the name of the profession. Traditionally, professions ending in -ant like accountant (or an adjective like bouyant) were connected with disciplines ending in -ancy like accountancy (or bouyancy) chiefly because the suffix -ant meaning One that performs, promotes, or causes a specified action  (as a noun) or Performing, promoting, or causing a specified action (as an adjective) because it derives from the Middle English (particularly the French influence) present participle forms of the verb are. —ExplorerCDT 00:13, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Accountancy]] → [[Accounting]]

message: This article mixes the processes and methods of accountancy (or accounting) with the profession or occupation of accountant and with the typical terms for businesses that do accountancy (or accounting). In the U.S., an accountant works for an accounting firm and does accounting. In the U.K., an accountant works for an accountancy (or accountancy firm) and does accountancy. Some U.S. schools award degrees for accounting, some award degrees for accountancy. U.K. schools award degrees for accountancy. The person doing this sort of work is always called an accountant, never an accountancy. I think the uses of the terms should be made explicit in the article, because the way the article reads, it's extremely confusing and mixes topics.  --SueHay 13:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If this differnce in meanings isn't sorted out soon and reflected in this article, you're doing harm to Wikipedia readers. PLEASE CLARIFY.  --SueHay 03:04, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: according to me it will not be so easy to give a clear concise definition of accounting since the relating word has many application with business and accounts.......Anoopnair2050 (talk) 09:22, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Accountancy, accountant, accounting

message: I don't see how the paragraph beginning "According to critics of standard accounting practices ..." follows from the previous paragraph. The criticism I've heard about accounting is whether financial measures are enough, historical cost, etc. I haven't seen any serious criticism of the double entry bookkeeping system which is what the placement of this paragraph implies.--Fredrik Coulter 00:35, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)
I don't know, that sentence baffles me to.  How any one can say that the records they kept in Vienna hundreds of years ago aren't much to the life long learning needed in todays field is beyond me. --lincs_geezer 20:41, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  According to critics ... 

message: It would seem alright to include a short comparison of Managerial and Financial accounting here. However, these 2 subjects are very broad and many accountants practice either Managerial or Financial and seldom is the case when both are given the task to practice both.
With more than 2 years experience working for PWC, in the field of audit and later under management consultancy, I cannot emphasize how different both of these accounting fields are. 
I'm trying to compose a detailed comparison and hopefully would post them later.
Modelwatcher 08:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Such a comparison is not needed in the main article. Managerial accounting is already listed in the short list of topics in accounting. It has no more relevance than the rest of the topics in the list. └ VodkaJazz / talk ┐ 13:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Managerial and Financial Accounting

message: Accounts
Finance/ Accounts are a very important department in every organisation. Every business needs to look after their financial side. 
The accounts function deals with financial operations such as paying bills, taxes, information of accounts and salaries etc.
The accounts department is to maintain a steady cash flow to support day-to-day transactions. 
The functions of accounts department includes:
Investments , Payments, Budgets, Transactions, Accounts Procedure, End of Year Accounts.
accounts represent amounts of money owed. These amounts are usually the result of the sale of assets or services provided.Anoopnair2050 (talk) 12:52, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Accounts Organisation

message: === History and Luca Pacioli and the birth of modern accountancy ===
These two sections need to be merged and there needs to be citations backing up the presented information.
=== Art of Science ===
The first paragraph of the history section (which I really like and know little about) starts off with "The art of accountancy on a scientific principle ..." This really bothers me. Art and science tend (for me) to not work well together. Is there any way of rewriting this so that it works better?--Fredrik Coulter 00:37, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)
I don't agree that accounting is a science at all, better to stick with calling it an art. The technology associated with book keeping has not changed since Pacioli. Accounting is an assemblage of rules to deal with modern complexities (and is a compromise to keep the tax man mostly happy and to keep CEO's mostly out of jail).
I changed this wording before discovering these comments.  I agree art and science do not mesh well; my objection related to the use of "science," which indicates an empirical basis versus a logical basis (thus mathematics). --EMU CPA 19:57, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: During a review of the edit history (see Revision as of 21:56, 25 November 2001 by Paul Drye), I found that much of the History section was quoted from the Project Gutenberg Encyclopedia, but the citation information has been deleted.  See entry under "Accountants" at http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext95/pge0112.txt. --EMU CPA 08:04, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of accounting 

message: The first paragraph of the history section (which I really like and know little about) starts off with "The art of accountancy on a scientific principle ..." This really bothers me. Art and science tend (for me) to not work well together. Is there any way of rewriting this so that it works better?--Fredrik Coulter 00:37, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)
I don't agree that accounting is a science at all, better to stick with calling it an art. The technology associated with book keeping has not changed since Pacioli. Accounting is an assemblage of rules to deal with modern complexities (and is a compromise to keep the tax man mostly happy and to keep CEO's mostly out of jail).
I changed this wording before discovering these comments.  I agree art and science do not mesh well; my objection related to the use of "science," which indicates an empirical basis versus a logical basis (thus mathematics). --EMU CPA 19:57, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: During a review of the edit history (see Revision as of 21:56, 25 November 2001 by Paul Drye), I found that much of the History section was quoted from the Project Gutenberg Encyclopedia, but the citation information has been deleted.  See entry under "Accountants" at http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext95/pge0112.txt. --EMU CPA 08:04, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Art of Science 

message: Do we need to have so much detail about each accounting organsiations and their history. Would they be better served with their own article. Can we not write about accountancy and finance. I don't want to know about accountancy organisations, who are now taking up a large part of this article. --NilssonDenver 17:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this an article about accountancy or accountancy bodies? 

message: Is "accounting" a profession? To "profess" a thought is to go out into the world as an individual and express your own ideas and opinions - you are then open to scrutiny as an individual in the world based on the results of the implementation your own ideas and opinions. Firstly, perhaps only 5% of accountants actually have this luxury in the real world of corporations and large practices; current organisational hierarchies simply do not accomodate professional behaviour in its true aspect. Secondly, the societal view of those few accountants that actually personally and individually profess, is seriously degraded due to recent ineptitudes such as Enron's balance sheet. Thirdly, the majority of the work done by the majority of "accountants" requires less skill than a mediocre high school student. In a real, today's world, modern office, practical look at the "profession" of accounting, they seem to have very little to "profess". Simply knowing how to set up a link on an Excel spreadsheet seems an especially cheap definition of a modern professional. The pretense of simply accepting accounting as a profession because of the historic analogy has to be dropped until we can accomodate its actual influence, and moreover those of its individual members as individuals, in a true objective professional light.
Whoever wrote this either thinks the entire world has an IQ > 150 or has obviously never taken any professional accounting exams, at least not in the UK anyway.  I agree it may not really be a profession except for those are practically law experts (tax gods etc) but I wouldnt hardly say "the majority of the work done by the majority of "accountants" requires less skill than a mediocre high school student".  As regards to the depth of the work involved thats why theres different job titles i.e. accounts clerk/accounts assistant/accounting technican/assistant accountant/accountant/financial controller etc etc at least in the UK anyway.--lincs_geezer 03:56, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course it's a profession. Picking apart the word "profession" is not a good way of determining what is and isn't one. Word meanings change over time.. I hope you are never in a situation where you have to take apart "inflammable" to figure out what it means. I don't know how it is in the UK, but CPA's in America do not spend their time dicking around in Excel (they bill far too much per hour to be doing routine work). Rhobite 19:30, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accounting as a profession 

message: I have added references showing this is just about the UK.
However, it seems this is largely lifted from the referenced article (including references to "Chart 1" which does not appear here).  That article is copyrighted, so how can we reproduce it here ?
-- Beardo 19:59, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Accounting firms supply a range of services, including audit and assurance, tax, corporate finance, wealth management and insolvency and business recovery."
I see a pattern emerging: that Accountancy has developed from relative humble beginnings in ancient Mesopotamia, and has grown in the range and sophistication in tandem with economic development. What is not apparent from this entire article is that it has become a jumbled list of accounting activities without the common thread of how it has developed --Gavin Collins 14:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size of market 

message: The source material lists the range of accounting services offered by the major firms of accountants:
:"Accounting firms supply a range of services, including audit and assurance, tax, corporate finance, wealth management and insolvency and business recovery."
I see a pattern emerging: that Accountancy has developed from relative humble beginnings in ancient Mesopotamia, and has grown in the range and sophistication in tandem with economic development. What is not apparent from this entire article is that it has become a jumbled list of accounting activities without the common thread of how it has developed --Gavin Collins 14:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accounting services 

message: === Editing this article ===
Two questions relevant to the quality/standard of this article: (1) Is it a problem that "accountant" is not mentioned until several paragraphs down from the top of the article? (2) can some articles be removed from the See also list since they are already in the body of the text? --57.68.49.4 16:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  See also 

message: Two questions relevant to the quality/standard of this article: (1) Is it a problem that "accountant" is not mentioned until several paragraphs down from the top of the article? (2) can some articles be removed from the See also list since they are already in the body of the text? --57.68.49.4 16:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing this article 

message: When I tried to wikify the SOX article, I found an enormous volume of accounting concepts seemed to lack Wiki articles, so I listed those omissions at Talk:Sarbanes-Oxley_Act#Related_Articles_Needed but I am not an accountant ... I think there ought to be a Wiki project group to review Wiki articles relevant to accounting, relevant to accounting standards, comparable to what other professions are doing here, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Law. User:AlMac|(talk) 05:57, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accounting Articles 

message: Those don't fit in the article so let me put them here until we find appropriate places.
Bookkeeping and Accountancy
Accounting Education and Training
See http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/000aaa/0000start.htm 
Accountancy and the Law
Accountancy vs. Fraud 
See http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/fraud.htm 
Creative accounting is a phrase sometimes used as a joke, but basically it means the questionable use of clever innovations. Sometimes this simply produces results which are difficult to understand; sometimes it results in out and out fraud.  Some consider the phrase "Accountancy as Fraud" more appropriate, and argue for more comprehensive accounting reform or the abolishment of the profession.
Accountancy and Taxation
Accounting complexity arises in part, perhaps in most part, from tax rules.  Tax, tariff and trade laws typically imply changes also to accounting practices, to mirror capital asset value gains and losses.
----
I have removed:
RECENT EVENTS 
Since 2002, the global step of reduction of costs and optimization of resources became a legal constraint, an obligation for all the highly-rated corporations or unquoted in the stock exchange. 
Everything began with the law SARBANNES-OXLEY in the United States in 2002 who returned compulsory internal control. From 2003, Canada and European Economic Community took measures aiming at identical objectives: 
1-	The  realization and optimization of the operations of reduction of costs and management of the performance;
2-	The reliability of the financial information of costs and performances; 
3-	Correspondence to laws and to current regulations, notably standards of management of the quality; 
4-	The implementation of the rules of good governance “to play collective” :
 
-Every individual member of the company contributes to his level of responsibility in the internal control; 
-The responsibilities of the staff of frame vary according to hierarchical levels; 
- The general manager assures ultimate responsibility; he is responsible for the system of internal control; 
-The directors of the various units are responsible for the internal control bound to the objectives of this one; 
-The financial executives and their teams play a role of dominating piloting: they follow and analyze performances, by report not only in objectives bound to financial information, but also to those bound to the operations of the company and to the legal obligations. 
These measures which impose the internal coherence as base of the management put company in front of a major technological challenge: the integration of their system of internal control. 
Internal control directed towards “realization and optimization of the operations of reduction of costs and management of the performance" gets organized indeed around the notion of inductors of costs, the unforeseen phenomenon, the abnormality or the dysfunction which provokes an increase of costs. By opposition the inductor of activity is the event which activates the activity of the company. 
To understand difficulty recovering, it is necessary remember yourself that the most known methods of management arise from the cost accounting which depends on the financial accounting itself. So  very  wide-spread methods such as the ABC (ACTIVITY-BASED COSTING), the ABM (ACTIVITY-BASED MANAGEMENT), “Cost killer””, etc., rest on the inductor of activity and not on the inductor of costs. 
It is only very recently that multi-field searches in management drove to the normalization of the inductor of costs and to its standardization through the new technologies of information and the communication.
See : 
* Internal control 
* Integration of the internal control
It seems off-topic. Maybe it should go to cost management or corporate governance. mydogategodshat 06:37, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Odd and Ends 

message: I have removed the following addition to the external links section:
*Accounting Degree - A resource to help find online accounting degrees.
I have done so in accordance with the guidline that states "Wikipedia is not a directory of everything that exists or has existed". --Gavin Collins 23:55, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A resource to help find online accounting degrees

message: I believe that, by comparing this page to the finance section, a cleanup is necessary. This seem even more necessary given the growing transparency of accounting and its far reaching implications. IAS to GAAP anyone?
(65.60.219.197 00:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  We have just today set up the Wikipedia:WikiProject Business and Economics/Accountancy task force with cleanup in mind. Please feel free to join.--Gavin Collins 00:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup may be necessary 

message: Wikipedia editor Gregalton states clearly in the Historical Cost discussion page that HCA does not destroy real value. I agree with him. It is a fact.
It is absurd to suggest that the global Historical Cost Accounting model destroys real value. It is impossible. I agree with Gregalton: historical cost accounting does not destroy value.
There is no dispute. All accountants in the world will agree with me and Gregalton that HCA does not destroy value.
It is absurd to suggest that the global Historical Cost Accounting model destroys real value. How can that be? It is impossible to suggest that all accountants are destroying real value in the way they do accounting and that this has been carrying on for ages. Absolutely impossible. What patent nonsense.
:But you have added a paragraph about this with absolutely no sources to support the statement, and you have added it as the first paragraph of the article, when it does not belong there.  If this is indeed incontrovertable fact, then you'll need to agree with other editors here on the talk page about where it belongs in the article, and identify the reliable sources you can use to verify it. No more edit-warring, please- we don't just revert each other's changes; we talk to each other and achieve consensus.  -FisherQueen (Talk) 16:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know anything at all about economics.  So, since I'm a layman and it isn't at all obvious to me, why don't you indulge me and provide a reliable source anyway?  In any case, this should not be the first paragraph of the article- it isn't a basic definition of the term 'accountancy.'  You should probably read WP:3RR before you make any more reverts on this article. -FisherQueen (Talk) 17:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is a source verifying that 1+1=2.  Here is another source to confirm the fact.  Now, will you provide a source for your assertion? -FisherQueen (Talk) 18:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This would appear to simply be another SPA spilling over from the Historical cost article.  I'm not sure I'd waste much time with him. Kuru talk 19:12, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The historical cost principle as applied in historical cost accounting never destroys real value 

message: This article could use the influence of an expert who can provide appropriate citations. 24.4.253.249 02:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Suggest you contact Michael Hardy. He wrote it. -- • • • Blue Pixel  02:53, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Attestation Standards]] 

message: Really long - is this a problem? Auroranorth 11:52, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its a big problem, but we are having difficulty replacing it with sourced material. The problem is there are a lot of editors adding unreferenced material to each section, so this article is not the subject of creeping original research. If you have access to a definition of accounting that is better, but has verificable sources, please let me know. --Gavin Collins 14:34, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead section

message: At the moment the professional organisations section seems to be a place that isn't relevant to the article on Accountancy. I understand that some editors want to put 'their' Institute or organisation in the list, and that is fine.
But if we want to have an exhaustive list of accountancy bodies, it would be better to have a separate article, in my opinion. AnthonyUK (talk) 10:25, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's an article about the occupation or profession in accountant. Maybe these organisations should go there. --Foggy Morning (talk) 23:56, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's just going to move the problem elsewhere, rather than solve it. I think I would prefer having a much more general paragraph in this article describing how accounting is largely self-regulating and have a link to an article called, say, List of Accountancy bodies, where editors who have an urge to add the accounting institute they are a member of can do so. AnthonyUK (talk) 12:39, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A list might work. You might want to look at Wikipedia:Lists, Wikipedia:Lists in Wikipedia, WP:LISTV#INC and Wikipedia:Featured list criteria to help you define the scope of this list and monitor additions and deletions. --Foggy Morning (talk) 01:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:   in favor . Sanjiv swarup (talk) 07:04, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

text:   in favor H.al-shawaf (talk) 23:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

text: From a cursory review, it looks pretty good.  I noticed a few things that I will add to my to-do list.  However, it's a good start.H.al-shawaf (talk) 21:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split off Professional Organisations section? 

message: Inspired by the list of concepts in this article, I've just had my first go at creating a Wikipedia page, on the realization concept listed there.  I was wondering if it would be alright to edit this topic to replace the black text with a link to the article?  I would also love any feedback on the article itself!  Thanks! Mreinkin (talk) 02:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Realization Concept 

message: The article Double-entry bookkeeping system badly needs your expertise. Please help cleanup and add inline citations as soon as possible. Many thanks for your help! --Foggy Morning (talk) 04:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Double-entry bookkeeping system]] 

message: Does anyone else feel that the page could use a few less self-referencial categories for navigation purposes?  accountancy is practically redundant and finance is somewhat a separate disipline.  For starters it might be nice to be a main path off of business.  Any thoughts?Mreinkin (talk) 00:00, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A bit unclear as to what you are suggesting.. Can you clarify?H.al-shawaf (talk) 19:04, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am with you on breaking this off from the finance category.  While finance has lent accountancy some ideas over the years, I think the two are distinct.  The accountancy category can stay.  If anything, it helps people who have found this page to find similar pages.H.al-shawaf (talk) 15:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Were you thinking of placing accountancy under a larger business category?  That might work.H.al-shawaf (talk) 14:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Categories 

message: I think there might be some validity to the accounting as the "synthesis for writing" entry.  If so, it would relate to Cuneiform script.  I remember something along these lines from a history class I took, but it needs verification.H.al-shawaf (talk) 15:46, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This could make an interesting start to writing a proper history section for the accounancy article. --Gavin Collins (talk) 16:31, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synthesis for Writing 

message: Suggest deletion of this second para. Does not make any sense Sanjiv swarup (talk) 16:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Dsecond paragraph deletion propsoal