Jump to content

Talk:Accounting

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Accounting/Comments)

Lead sentence

[edit]
Clearly no support for the changes Wikinegarr wishes to make. — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite 19:08, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The lead sentence must be concise and as clear as possible. Recently there have been repeated attempts to add the word 'analyzing' to the opening sentence. The addition clutters up the opening with wording that is redundant both in terms of what is already in the opening sentence and will the explicit mention of analysis in paragraph two. Its addition is not an improvement to the article, thus I have reverted. MrOllie (talk) 16:06, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prioritizing the correct meaning. This meaning is not correct. If we don't add analytics, we've lost the meaning of bookkeeping to the audience. The most important difference between bookkeeping and accounting is this.Bookkeeping is the first part of the accounting process, so the work of a bookkeeper and accountant often overlaps. Bookkeeping focuses on recording and organising financial data, while accounting is the interpretation and presentation of that data. We need to make clear the difference between them. Wikinegarr (talk) 21:08, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The word analysis does not exist in the main definition of accounting at the beginning of the article, and according to some common misconceptions that accounting does not focus on analysis and its exclusive focus on recording information and not analyzing them, the presence of the word analysis at the beginning of the article is not sabotage or disruptive action. Not that this user insists on dealing with it. I tried to invite the user to reach a consensus through various methods, but he did not respond to me and did not cooperate. Adding the word analysis to the main definition of accounting at the beginning of the article is not a problem. Please register this issue as a consensus and add the word analysis to the article. thanks Wikinegarr (talk) 21:10, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you contributing via Google translate or something? Sentences like The most important difference between bookkeeping and sensitivity is this don't make any sense. MrOllie (talk) 23:25, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I meanThe most important difference between bookkeeping and accounting Wikinegarr (talk) 06:12, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you awnser this please? @MrOllie we need to make clear th difference between bookkeeping and accounting in the lead. The difference between them is that accounting involves analysis but bookkeeping just involves recording and processing. Bookkeeping is a part of accounting but not all of it. It's not a big problem. Is it really hard for us to make their difference clear by adding just one word of analysis? I am sure what i wrote now is completely understandable. Wikinegarr (talk) 09:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article does do that, in the second paragraph. To quote: Management accounting focuses on the measurement, analysis and reporting of information for internal use by management to enhance business operations. The recording of financial transactions, so that summaries of the financials may be presented in financial reports, is known as bookkeeping, of which double-entry bookkeeping is the most common system.
I have been doing you the courtesy of answering your questions, are you going to answer mine? I'll repeat it here: are you using translation software? MrOllie (talk) 11:35, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MrOllie no i am not Wikinegarr (talk) 20:31, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MrOllie why you don't let the lead to do that and make their difference clear? Wikinegarr (talk) 20:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What I just quoted is already in the lead. It is already doing it. We don't need to redundantly do it twice. MrOllie (talk) 20:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MrOllie the lead just talk about recording, processing and measuring. there is no word here with the meaning of analytics and in this way, the lead describes bookkeeping,not accounting. Wikinegarr (talk) 20:35, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there is. The ones I quoted in green a couple messages ago. MrOllie (talk) 20:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MrOllie you talked about other parts of articles. i am talking about the lead . why you don't let the article to make their difference clear? what is it's problem? what problem is with making their difference clear in the lead? Wikinegarr (talk) 20:46, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MrOllie can i talk about their difference after the lead? Wikinegarr (talk) 20:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article already discusses it, and then there are links to other articles containing more information. I don't know what you'd add to the article that isn't already here. MrOllie (talk) 20:57, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i can't find it. Tell me the word that you mean. Wikinegarr (talk) 20:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly the words I quoted a few messages above. They appear in the second paragraph of the lead. MrOllie (talk) 20:52, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MrOllie i konw but it's not describing accounting m it's talking about management accounting. the article is like management accounting involves analysis but accounting not. it's like management accounting is something out of accounting. but management accounting is subfield of accounting. when management accounting involves it, it's impossible for accounting to not involve the analysis. would you please let me delete that from second paragraph and rewrite it in a better way in main part of lead in first paragraph? i am asking you this because main sentence of lead is very more important than other parts. we need to make the difference between accounting and bookkeeping clear in their main definition. check the main sentence of the lead in bookkeeping article. there is no serious difference between that and accounting. so please let the word of analysis show itself in the main definition of accounting in the lead. thanks Wikinegarr (talk) 21:04, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikinegarr It is in the lead already. It does not need to go into the first sentence. From MOS:FIRST: "Do not overload the first sentence by describing everything notable about the subject. Instead, spread the relevant information out over the entire lead." —C.Fred (talk) 21:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@C.Fred as it's an important point i request to delete it from that part and move it in first sentence. in this way we can't say the word of analysis is repeated. i am asking this because it's important and it needs to be in first sentence. Wikinegarr (talk) 21:10, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's much better where it is, where it can be explained with proper weight and context. MrOllie (talk) 21:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it's not. because most of people just read the main sentence of lead and do not pay attention to rest of it. Main sentence of lead should be complete. Now it's incomplete. Why you don't let it to be complete?At least i suggest to write words that can inconve all of recording and analytics related things.like this: Accounting provides financial information about an organization's economic activities to aid decision-making. Wikinegarr (talk) 21:21, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The opening sentence must be kept short. If it were 'complete' it would be as long as the article is. MrOllie (talk) 21:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it must be short but not in a way that make a wrong meaning. Now it's wrong because it's definition of bookkeeping,not accounting.Be sure that just one word of analysis will not make that an article! Wikinegarr (talk) 08:53, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikinegarr I have to agree with MrOllie, especially since looking at the body of the article, the place I see "analysis" come up is in reference to managerial accounting. —C.Fred (talk) 21:17, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • IMO, the current intro does a good job of defining the subject. Here's a literal textbook definition, since I have one on my desk: "Accounting is the information system that measures business activities, processes the information into reports, and communicates the results to decision makers."[1] Nowhere in the first few paragraphs of the book does the word "analysis" come up, nor is it in the AAA's Pathways Vision Model—and when it does come up, it's in the context of analyzing a transaction to determine how to record it, i.e., to prepare the journal entry, which a bookkeeper could do! Another quote worth noting: "According to Robert Half's 2022 Salary Guide, the top in-demand positions that rely on accounting skills are controllers, financial analysts, tax accountants, auditors, cost accountants, accounting clerks/bookkeepers, and business systems analysts."[emphasis added] So, bookkeeper can be viewed as synonymous with accounting clerk. I don't see the need for a distinction as holding water, either overall or with respect to needing "analysis" in the definition. —C.Fred (talk) 20:37, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    view my source about analysis in accounting Wikinegarr (talk) 20:41, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Needles is out of print, so I can't get to a desk copy. —C.Fred (talk) 20:50, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
hello guys. it's my last request:
I am reaching out to you once again, with a final request regarding the initial sentence in the "Accounting" article on Wikipedia. After reflecting on our previous conversations and reexamining the article, I believe there is a significant contradiction in how the definition of accounting is currently presented, which I’d like to discuss in more detail.
The article, as it stands, introduces "accounting" in its most general sense without any mention of "analysis" in the opening definition. This omission is particularly concerning because later in the same article, when discussing management accounting, it explicitly mentions that management accounting involves analysis. This creates an inherent contradiction: how can one specialized branch of accounting (i.e., management accounting) include analysis while the broader field of accounting, which encompasses all subfields, does not?
This suggests that accounting as a whole is merely about recording transactions, which is a gross oversimplification of the profession. The field of accounting, in reality, is much broader. Accounting not only involves recording financial information but also interpreting, analyzing, and presenting it in ways that assist decision-making for businesses, individuals, and governments alike. To exclude any mention of analysis in the opening definition of the entire field is misleading and diminishes the full scope of what accounting truly entails.
What is even more contradictory is that analysis plays a critical role in all aspects of accounting, not just in management accounting. Financial accounting, for example, requires rigorous analysis to prepare accurate financial statements, interpret company performance, and ensure compliance with standards. Similarly, audit and tax accounting are also grounded in analytical processes that go far beyond simple bookkeeping. In fact, without analysis, accounting information would be of little use to stakeholders, as raw data alone does not inform strategic decisions.
Given that the article later discusses analysis in the context of management accounting, I believe it is essential to reflect this in the broader definition of accounting as well. Not only would this resolve the contradiction, but it would also provide readers with a more accurate and complete understanding of the field from the outset.
I propose a slight but meaningful revision to the opening sentence, which could say something like: "Accounting is the process of recording, analyzing, and reporting financial information." This small addition acknowledges that accounting is not limited to recording transactions but also involves the critical step of analyzing financial data to provide meaningful insights.
I genuinely believe this revision will enhance the accuracy and clarity of the article, and I kindly ask you to reconsider my suggestion. Thank you for your dedication to ensuring that Wikipedia provides high-quality and informative content, and I hope we can collaborate to resolve this issue for the benefit of all readers. Wikinegarr (talk) 12:30, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kindly stop pasting this AI-generated WP:WALLOFTEXT everywhere, this is the third location so far. MrOllie (talk) 12:31, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did not wanted to post it here. you and others told me that i have to move this text here so i did it. it is no ai. it is for myselfe. Wikinegarr (talk) 12:34, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe that, and neither do AI-detection tools. MrOllie (talk) 12:35, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it's not AI did you get somewhere else to write it for you? Since it's not how you normally write. If you got someone else to write it for you this is concerning since it's unclear if you got proper permission to contribute this person's work under the GFDL and CC BY-SA 4.0 licences. Unless you have proper permission, please redact all your posts of this and ask for them to be deleted as WP:Copyvio. Nil Einne (talk) 14:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nil Einne it's not ai. it's from myself. it's not how i normally write Because i normally don't have enough time so i talk with microphone and it changes my voice to text but it seems that there's something wrong with microphone and sometimes it can not convert my voice to correct text Wikinegarr (talk) 15:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikinegarr: Sorry but that's nonsense. A dictation system will not use the non-standard capitalisation and spacing you normally use. And it's unlikely to make the mistakes you normally make which are seem to be clearly the mistakes of someone who is a non-native speaker of English rather than voice recognition errors. Nil Einne (talk) 15:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nil Einne that is possible because of my old system. Wikinegarr (talk) 15:26, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikinegarr: No it's not how such systems have ever worked since it makes absolutely no sense. An understanding of the basics of programming and language will reveal this. Or you can just go back to something 20 years ago and see it's not how they work. BTW, a dictation system will not make spelling errors, like you sometimes do, unless you are spelling out the word letter by letter which no one is likely to do for simple English words not least because it's very slow. (A dictation system might interpret the wrong word, e.g. it's plausible it could interpret know as no; but it's not going to spit out konw instead of know or awnser instead of answer.) Nil Einne (talk) 15:32, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nil Einne A combination of my grammatical weaknesses, my haste to speak and not thinking about proper sentence structure, my non-English accent, and my microphone and system issues led to those mistakes, and it's entirely possible. We are not talking about a healthy microphone and system. We are talking about a broken system and microphone. Wikinegarr (talk) 15:48, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikinegarr: no it's not. It's not how such systems work. However you speak and however broken such systems are they are not going to spit out konw or awnser unless these words were add to their dictionary. They are not going to randomly fail to capitalise i and especially not fail to capitalise the first letter of a sentence in some cases while capitalising them elsewhere and then randomly capitalising the first letter of a word when it isn't needed. They are not going to add two spaces between a period and the next word in one instance "meaning. This" and then add no spaces in another "this.Bookkeeping". I suggest you desist with this nonsense. Using an LLM is a problem, but is IMO not an instant site ban offence. Making up such nonsense IMO clearly is. An editor who makes up nonsense in their comments cannot be trusted and so should never be editing Wikipedia. Nil Einne (talk) 16:34, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know why @Wikinegarr: is so set on including "analysis" in the first sentence, but their explanations have not provided a compelling case for it, nor have they identified here any secondary sources that specifically include it in their definition. I was willing to WP:AGF in this editor, but I am starting to have my reservations about whether they have the project's best interests in mind, especially in light of their most recent post, which is clearly the work of a LLM. —C.Fred (talk) 18:38, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@C.Fred the reason is that if you don't add the analysis in the main sentence of lead, main definition of accounting in article would be the definition of bookkeeping, not accounting. the difference between bookkeeping and accounting is about analysis. Wikinegarr (talk) 21:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikinegarr As I've already shown, textbooks don't include analysis in the definition. Based on what specific source are you so adamant that analysis must be included? —C.Fred (talk) 21:04, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@C.Fred the user who deleted my edits accepted my sources about this subject so let don't discuss about source. his problem is something else. he says somewhere else of article talked about analysis.but my problem is that it's not enough because we need to put "analysis" on the main part of lead not in other parts. Wikinegarr (talk) 21:19, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikinegarr I'm not that editor. I want to know what the source is. I will repeat my request: please provide the specific source that you are relying on about putting analysis in the first sentence. If you do not provide a specific source, you leave me in the awkward position of making a judgement call of whether your non-answer means: (1) no such source exists and you are bluffing, which would be disruptive behaviour; (2) the source exists but you refuse to provide it, which would be disruptive behaviour, or (3) you do not understand what I asked, which would raise concerns about minimum competence to edit. —C.Fred (talk) 21:26, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@C.Fred If I provide reliable sources, do you promise to cooperate with me and apply the necessary edits to the article, and if your edits are removed, do the necessary follow-up to add the word analysis to the article, like me? Wikinegarr (talk) 21:30, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikinegarr I'm not agreeing to anything sight unseen. If you have sources, I expect to see them in your next reply. —C.Fred (talk) 22:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@C.Fred [2][3][4] Accounting measures and analyzes[5] Wikinegarr (talk) 11:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikinegarr Where specifically does that appear in the cited source? I do not see that text. Further, I will note that the text you're citing is very close to advertising material from the AICPA and CIMA about the CGMA credential, and the material is focused on managerial accounting. (Disclosure: I was a CGMA when the AICPA rolled it out in the US and awarded it to all CPAs, but I did not keep the credential active.) —C.Fred (talk) 11:43, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@C.Fred search the text of pages. then you will see the word of analysis. Wikinegarr (talk) 11:49, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikinegarr I did, and it was not in the cited document. —C.Fred (talk) 03:24, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.mccombs.utexas.edu/undergraduate-programs/bba/academics/majors/accounting-major/
https://www.flatworldsolutions.com/financial-services/differences-between-bookkeeping-accounting.php
https://www.netsuite.com/portal/resource/articles/accounting/accounting.shtml Wikinegarr (talk) 08:17, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And here's Flatworld's definition: "Accounting is the process of summarizing, interpreting, and communicating financial transactions which were classified in the ledger account".[1] No mention of analysis. —C.Fred (talk) 12:07, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Accounting analyst Wikinegarr (talk) 08:20, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If I am the user being discussed here, do not put words in my mouth and claim my support for your sources (or indeed for anything else). MrOllie (talk) 01:55, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MrOllie you said all those things. it doesn't matter after that you changed your talks or not. you said your problem is just with the place of analysis word. not with itself. Wikinegarr (talk) 11:37, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, that never happened. Provide diffs or retract your statement. MrOllie (talk) 15:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Omit analysis and close the thread. The only editor proposing the addition of "analysis" has failed to provide sources supporting the claim that it is part of the definition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by C.Fred (talk • contribs) 08:07, October 4, 2024 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Tracie Miller-Nobles and Brenda Mattison, eds. Horngren's Accounting. 14th edition.
  2. ^ Cite error: The named reference NP 2013 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ Cite error: The named reference HDF 2006 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ "How Management Accounting Drives Sustainable Success" (PDF). Chartered Global Management Accountant (CGMA). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2015-02-26.
  5. ^ "How Management Accounting Drives Sustainable Success" (PDF). Chartered Global Management Accountant (CGMA). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2015-02-26.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Question about Relationship between management accounting and accounting

[edit]
Closed as a continuation of the above discussion, no reason to open two sections. — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite 19:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello. The article claims that management accounting involves analysis. However, accounting as a broader discipline has been described as a field related to record-keeping, without mentioning the presence of analysis. Users are asking me to provide a credible source that mentions the presence of analysis in accounting, and when I sent the sources, they denied them. Now my question is this: when the article mentions that management accounting involves analysis, why is this not accepted, and why are users asking me to prove to them that accounting includes analysis? If management accounting involves analysis, isn't it clear that accounting itself also includes analysis? Management accounting is a part of accounting. If management accounting involves analysis, then accounting as a whole does too, and this article claims that management accounting involves analysis. Wikinegarr (talk) 14:01, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's just a simple question. Can someone Awnser it? Wikinegarr (talk) 14:03, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was never stated that accounting doesn't involve analysis. However, the word "analysis" is not a core part of any textbook definition of accounting, nor is it such an important function overall that it warrants a mention in the first sentence. Analysis is mentioned in the context of managerial accounting in the introductory section, but in the same way that the disciplines of managerial accounting and financial accounting aren't mentioned in the first sentence, the first sentence does not need to contain every verb for actions that accountants do. —C.Fred (talk) 01:07, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was stated that accounting doesn't involve analysis. Because recording,processing and measuring aren't about analysis and the main definition of accounting in the lead is this:"Accounting, also known as accountancy, is the process of recording and processing information about economic entities, such as businesses and corporations. Accounting measures the results of an organization's economic activities". so we need to put the word of analysis between them and if can't we have to replace these words with other words that cover the concept of analysis. Wikinegarr (talk) 12:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the first sentence does not need to contain every verb for actions that accountants do but need to contain verbs that their meaning cover all actions of accountants. Like this: Accounting is the process of preparing and interpreting of financial information and reports. Wikinegarr (talk) 16:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Accounting&oldid=1249600385"