Talk:Double-entry bookkeeping/Archive 1

message: US English
===Other spelling issues, hyphens and english language differences===
Now that bookkeeping has been moved to its own area, the difference between bookkeeping and accounting can be explained. Bookkeeping is the recording of information, accounting is the using of that information. This can now be further explained in bookkeeping. Double-entry bookkeeping system is also used to describe Double-entry accounting system.
A lot more links need to be setup to redirect back to Double-entry accounting system
Word Combinations problems:<BR>
Double-entry or Double entry (people may search using "incorrect" grammar) <BR>
bookkeeping or book-keeping<BR>
system or no system in title<BR>
Accounting or Bookkeeping --NilssonDenver 13:13, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Language used

message: Now that bookkeeping has been moved to its own area, the difference between bookkeeping and accounting can be explained. Bookkeeping is the recording of information, accounting is the using of that information. This can now be further explained in bookkeeping. Double-entry bookkeeping system is also used to describe Double-entry accounting system.
A lot more links need to be setup to redirect back to Double-entry accounting system
Word Combinations problems:<BR>
Double-entry or Double entry (people may search using "incorrect" grammar) <BR>
bookkeeping or book-keeping<BR>
system or no system in title<BR>
Accounting or Bookkeeping --NilssonDenver 13:13, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other spelling issues, hyphens and english language differences

message: A request (30th June 2006) has been made to tidy up the article. I have done some tidying up. For those that have contributed to this article, please review any changes made to your contributions or suggest changes to any other information added. --NilssonDenver 05:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tidy up

message: Bookkeeping is not accounting. Bookkeeping is the keeping of books. Accounting is another subject.
Please do not change the article name. There has been much discussion and as someone in this industry for over twenty years, double-entry bookkeeping is the term used. I am removing the request to change the name to double-entry accounting. This article name has been discussed, you can read the history for yourself. NilssonDenver 21:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Given the expiration of the deadline above and taking into account the apprent consensus reached in discussion below,  I have now renamed this article and fixed up all the redirects.  -- The Anome 08:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Double-entry accounting system

message: Is this the right name? I've always seen this refered to as "Double entry book-keeping", not "booking". Google gives several thousand hits for "Double entry book-keeping" and only 66 for "double entry booking". Also, the capitalisation doesn't follow normal Wikipedia style. -- DrBob 22:53 Jan 10, 2003 (UTC)
I agree, so I moved the article.  However, some people might argue for bookkeeping rather than book-keeping. -- Heron
You mean people who can actually spell?  "Book-keeping" is inexcusably illiterate.  That spelling has no place on Wikipedia. 
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=book-keeping&x=0&y=0
--User:Spellingguy
:I was inclined to agree, as this spelling and hyphenation appeared odd to me.  However, an internet search for either form yielded results, and it appears "book-keeping" is the commonly used form in The Queen's English  ; )   --70.236.161.82 09:17, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. 'Bookkeeping' is, to my knowledge, the correct usage. —Stonefield 17:39, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Double-entry system" was a temporary name to stop to-and-fro move wars; after lengthy discussion, I believe that consensus has now finally been reached, and I have moved this article to double-entry bookkeeping system. -- The Anome 08:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Moving

message: ====Are we agreed on the name for this entry. Yes/No?====
I keep seeing references to Double-entry bookkeeping. Is it Double entry accounting or Double-entry bookkeeping? Bookkeepers do the work, books are used, what is the difference between accounting and bookkeeping?
Wikipedia definition of accounting is<BR>
Accountancy (profession) or accounting (methodology) is the measurement, disclosure or provision of assurance about information that helps managers and other decision makers make resource allocation decisions.
Wikipedia definition of bookkeeping is<BR>
Bookkeeping is the recording of all financial transactions undertaken by a business (or an individual)
Based on these definitions I would go for bookkeeping --NilssonDenver 22:37, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rename

message: I keep seeing references to Double-entry bookkeeping. Is it Double entry accounting or Double-entry bookkeeping? Bookkeepers do the work, books are used, what is the difference between accounting and bookkeeping?
Wikipedia definition of accounting is<BR>
Accountancy (profession) or accounting (methodology) is the measurement, disclosure or provision of assurance about information that helps managers and other decision makers make resource allocation decisions.
Wikipedia definition of bookkeeping is<BR>
Bookkeeping is the recording of all financial transactions undertaken by a business (or an individual)
Based on these definitions I would go for bookkeeping --NilssonDenver 22:37, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Are we agreed on the name for this entry. Yes/No?

message: FINAL ARTICLE NAME: Double-entry bookkeeping system<BR>
The following to be redirected:<BR>
Double-entry book-keeping system<BR>
Double-entry bookkeeping<BR>
Double-entry book-keeping<BR>
Double-entry accounting system<BR>
Double-entry accounting<BR>
Double entry bookkeeping system<BR>
Double entry book-keeping system<BR>
Double entry bookkeeping<BR>
Double entry book-keeping<BR>
Double entry accounting system<BR>
Double entry accounting<BR>
Possible redirects but may conflict with other articles:<BR>
Double-entry system<BR>
Double entry system<BR>
Double-entry<BR>
Double entry<BR>
Not to be redirected as they have their own article:<BR>
Bookkeeping<BR>
Book-keeping<BR>
Bookkeeper<BR>
Book-keeper<BR>
Accountancy<BR>
Accounting<BR>
Once and for all can with go with this so that all references can reference the correct article and I can get on with finishing my double-entry example? --NilssonDenver 21:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Final naming

message: I'm not an accountant, but I (think I) understand debits and credits well enough to write a simple example, which I have done.  If this is not correct, please fix it, remove it, or write your own. Gwimpey 02:09, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
I'm also learning about accounting and I was confused about exactly what Debit and Credit means. After digging around, it appears the names are just labels and shouldn't be interpreted based on the definitions of those words. Debit simply means put in the left column and Credit in the right. We should make a note of this perhaps. - Fando
The OED definitions 10 and 12 of credit, n seem most appropriate.  Credit is money or assets on the books at the disposal of the account.
Debit is simply money or assets owed by the account, according to the first OED entry for debit, n.
It makes sense then that Debit and Credits must sum to zero:  If you owe me money, to me that debt is an asset at my disposal (a credit), and to you it a debt you owe (a debit) --ASL 21:19, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  More on debits/credits 

message: The definitions of debit and credit don't really explain what the terms mean, they merely say to me:  a debit increases a debit account, and a credit increases a credit account.  Okay, that's nice.  If someone tells me "This is an expense account," how do I reason out whether it is a debit or credit account, other than rote memorization?  What are the first priciples?  --ASL 05:55, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not an accountant but I find the following clarifies things (assuming it is valid :P).  Imagine if a business was instantly liquidated and the money handed to a person named Bob.  Now Bob is indebted (as in DEBIT) to the shareholders and the creditors of the business.  The shareholders and creditors have CREDITs with Bob.  So on the credit side we have people/entities who own certain proportions of the business.  On the debit side we have what makes up the business, measured dollars and cents.  If a creditor were then to lend Bob more money then it would be additional debt for Bob, but a credit for the creditor.  If Bob were to give money to shareholders then he gets a credit while the shareholder gets a debit.  I hope that helps someone.  
--207.81.225.190 02:14, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

text: While an "abnormal" balance may indicate a problem, the statement "must always have" is entirely false.  There are numerous contra-accounts (e.g., Accumulated Depreciation, Drawings) that do not have "normal" balances, plus cutoff issues. --70.236.161.82 09:17, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Agreed.  I just don't think you should say "must always have" when describing any account balance (i.e., accumulated depreciation is technically an asset account, but has a credit balance); "normally should have" would be better, but it's just semantics.  The original question here dealt with how to reason it out vs. rote memorization; I think memorization plus knowing the accounting equation is the key.  --EMU CPA 04:00, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circular Definition 

message: Hi all, I've tagged the article as disputed because of this bullet point:  "Revenue (note that since it is a credit, revenue is recorded as a negative number)", and because of other implications of negative numbers being recorded in transactions.  I'm not an accountant, so I don't want to try to say anything with authority, but...  this just seems wrong, it disagrees with the accounting books I have, and my wife (who has a degree in finance) also thinks it doesn't look right.  Yes, a revenue account has a normal balance of credit, meaning you post credits to increase the value of the account.  To decrease the value of an account with a credit normal balance, you post debits.  No negative numbers should ever be posted in either the debit or credit column of a transaction, as far as I know.  Stevegt 06:31, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes there was a problem with the point. I've removed it it is non-sensical out of context. The only context where it would be relevent would be when using a single column to record both debits and credits, such as in database, or rough work. I've never seen anybody do this outside of a classroom though. In the real world people seem to be fairly fond of their debits and credits. I think this was a "classroom" explaination that "escaped". --Mig77 12:10, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Posting Negative Numbers/Revenue 

message: ===Example 1 discussion===
* Is it understandable? Any questions about it? Are further explanations required?--NilssonDenver 07:13, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What level of explanation should be shown? If first principles mean showing a beginner then that would not be appropriate here. I feel a wikipedia book would be more appropriate. Double-entry bookkeeping requires training. What I have tried to do here is get across the principle of Double-Entry and that Debits must equal Credits. I feel that the explanation is long and perhaps there should be a link to the example outside of the main article. The example I hoped would give a visual explanation to the reader. The article on Double-Entry Bookkeeping is an introduction and if you understand it that is great, but if you don't then you probably need to get training. But I do understand what you are saying and I am looking for a way to guide this article so that it is easy to read and gives a primer to the reader but not necessarily a lesson in bookkeeping. All comments are really appreciated and actively sought. NilssonDenver 22:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

text: No - you wouldn't normally do this.  The stock/inventory of a business is not usually treated as one account (this is because business might buy stock at different prices) but as separate sales and purchases accounts.  You don't then have double entry transactions through an inventory account.  So when a sale is made you increase debtors and increase sales (dr debtors/cr sales).  When the debtor pays you decrease debtors and increase cash (dr cash, cr debtors).  The level of stock is adjusted for at the period end - often following a physical stock take).  Make sense?  --BramleyBarn 18:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples section 

message: * Is it understandable? Any questions about it? Are further explanations required?--NilssonDenver 07:13, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What level of explanation should be shown? If first principles mean showing a beginner then that would not be appropriate here. I feel a wikipedia book would be more appropriate. Double-entry bookkeeping requires training. What I have tried to do here is get across the principle of Double-Entry and that Debits must equal Credits. I feel that the explanation is long and perhaps there should be a link to the example outside of the main article. The example I hoped would give a visual explanation to the reader. The article on Double-Entry Bookkeeping is an introduction and if you understand it that is great, but if you don't then you probably need to get training. But I do understand what you are saying and I am looking for a way to guide this article so that it is easy to read and gives a primer to the reader but not necessarily a lesson in bookkeeping. All comments are really appreciated and actively sought. NilssonDenver 22:27, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Example 1 discussion

message: Regarding this exerpt from the "Examples" section:
   Selling merchandise on credit:
      1. The amount of trade receivables (an asset) for the business increases.
      2. The sales revenue for the business increases (eventually this will become part of equity).
   Upon payment, the trade receivables account decreases while the cash account increases.''
Should 2. read: The inventory (an asset) for the business decreases.
Following that it should read: Upon payment, the trade receivables account (an asset) decreases while the sales_revenue/cash account (an asset) increases. 
This seems like it would better account for each occurence of the transaction...thoughts?
--JFN 05:11, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No - you wouldn't normally do this.  The stock/inventory of a business is not usually treated as one account (this is because business might buy stock at different prices) but as separate sales and purchases accounts.  You don't then have double entry transactions through an inventory account.  So when a sale is made you increase debtors and increase sales (dr debtors/cr sales).  When the debtor pays you decrease debtors and increase cash (dr cash, cr debtors).  The level of stock is adjusted for at the period end - often following a physical stock take).  Make sense?  --BramleyBarn 18:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Example 2 discussion

message: ===History - Are there any other places that more history on bookkeeping can be found?===
===Explanations and definitions - Should there be more?===
===Double-Entry working examples - Should there be a link to another wiki entry?===
Link example 1 to "Double-entry bookkeeping system examples"
This would make the article shorter and more readable --NilssonDenver 20:00, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, line 3 should read Other and not trade creditors. My mistake when copying text. I have fixed it in main article. NilssonDenver 22:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: How should this article be completed

message: Link example 1 to "Double-entry bookkeeping system examples"
This would make the article shorter and more readable --NilssonDenver 20:00, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, line 3 should read Other and not trade creditors. My mistake when copying text. I have fixed it in main article. NilssonDenver 22:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Double-Entry working examples - Should there be a link to another wiki entry?

message: This template I feel is restrictive in what it shows. Many of the items under Basic Accounting to me are not basic accounting. And what is the point of "other". Other can be unlimited in what could be listed there. The design of it is not in style with the rest of the article. Can someone point our where it came from. Is this now the format for templates to be placed in articles? NilssonDenver 00:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Accounting Template

message: Suggestion: anyone care to explain the meaning of: A/c, a/c, b/f, and c/f in the Article? It might be interesting not only for non-natives in English... Thx. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.178.77.228 (talk) 08:47, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanation? 

message: I recognize that user NilssonDenver prefers not to use the template above, but does anyone else feel that templates should be included to unify the articles within the area of accounting? The content of the template could be improved to meet the consensus of users, if necessary...--Dpr 16:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Using template