From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Consensus is that this is a matter of content organization and naming that can be resolved with mergers and/or redirects if needed, but does not require deletion.  Sandstein  06:36, 14 August 2016 (UTC) reply

Generally accepted accounting principles

Generally accepted accounting principles (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article tries to impose an Anglophone concept on all global economies, describing as an universal concept, which in fact is much more diverse.
Some jurisdictions don't have codified GAAP at all, multiple standard accounting practices for different types of business, use one or multiple foreign and/or international standards. Apart from US GAAP, UK GAAP, Canadian GAAP and possibly nl:Belgian GAAP, these mostly aren't called "GAAP" at all.
The frameworks are also very different in scope. The Plan Comptable Générale basically is a balance sheet, while a "German GAAP" is completely unknown – there's the HGB-Standard though.
At the same time, the article is almost identical to Standard accounting practice which is much better positioned as a main article to give an overview about US GAAP, UK GAAP, German HGB, the IFRS and many others standards. The " Global standardization" section may be merged to Standard accounting practice, otherwise Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (capitalized) should merely be a disambiguation page for the few standard accounting practices that are actually named "GAAP".
PanchoS ( talk) 09:11, 30 July 2016 (UTC) reply

  • Comment The fact that some jurisdictions don't have something called GAAP isn't a reason for deletion, see WP:OTHERSTUFF, it works both ways.-- Savonneux ( talk) 11:12, 30 July 2016 (UTC) reply
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 15:05, 30 July 2016 (UTC) reply
  • Indeed. This isn't a good candidate for deletion. It needs editing or cleanup, not deletion.-- Savonneux ( talk) 06:00, 1 August 2016 (UTC) reply
@ DGG: This term is also used in Canada.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 00:54, 6 August 2016 (UTC) reply
  • Keep If the article has issues then fix them. Don't take the easy way by simply deleting the information. Ottawahitech ( talk) 20:45, 9 August 2016 (UTC)please ping me reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.