Talk:Accounts receivable/Archives/2012

Accounts receivable vs Account receivables

I've heard the term "accounts receivable" and "account receivables" used interchangeably and came to Wikipedia hoping to learn which term is correct. Unfortunately, the article, too, uses both terms. I suspect that "account receivables" is an improper term. But perhaps "account receivables" is, in fact, a valid term when one is referring to a single debtor that owes on multiple ledger items (i.e. one account, multiple receivables)? Let's get to the bottom of this! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.72.250.165 (talk) 19:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

... "accounts(plurial) receivable(singular)" and "account(singular) receivables(plurial)".. it's all correct mate... (:-))) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.18.17.91 (talk) 10:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Grammatically speaking, "accounts receivable" is correct. Account is the noun, and receivable is the adjective describing it -- "accounts which are owing" -- and because there are several, the noun is pluralised. Account receivables is only grammatically correct if the entire expression "account receivable" is considered a proper noun. --Jtgibson (talk) 04:35, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

A small note on accounts receivable

Accounts receivable is a ledger in its own self-contained way. But that is not where the scope of accounting of AR ends. It ends after it is posted to General Ledger. So from the GL perspective, AR can be seen as a place which holds "transactions" very specific to "debt clearance by the external parties".

AR is a ledger. To be more specific, it is a subledger which has is its own journal postings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhigyan81 (talk • contribs) 13:59, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Post copy edit

Finished copy edit. Rearranged a bunch of content after spelling/grammar/usage overhaul. Request accountancy expert review new organization and author better overview than that given. Paulmnguyen (talk) 02:59, 23 July 2010 (UTC)