Talk:Luca Pacioli

Luca was referenced in the Pale King

the new unfinished novel by David Foster Wallace

This asymmetry was just one more thing that compromised Sylvanshine’s self-regard since Rome and made him doubly loyal and grateful to Systems Director Lehrl for having salvaged him from the debris of the catastrophe in Rome and believing in his potential once his niche as a cog in the system was found. The double-entry method invented by Italian Pacioli during the same period as C. Columbus et alia. The card indicated that this was the type of aircraft whose emergency oxygen was a fire-extinguisherish thing beneath the seats rather than dropping from overhead. The primitive opacity of the figures’ faces was actually scarier than fear or some kind of visible expression would have been. -- Wallace, David Foster (2011). The Pale King (Kindle Locations 138-143). Little, Brown and Company. Kindle Edition.

Can there be some sort of "appearances in pop culture" about this? -- Charlie (Charles Jeffrey Danoff 03:49, 19 May 2011 (UTC))

Revert of edits to lede

Pacioli made an important contribution to the development of modern accounting, but he did not "found" accounting. The lede probably could be improved; the second sentence seems a bit out of sequence. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 16:38, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

More reverts in the lede

@115ash: Let's have a discussion here before any more reverts. Luca Pacioli is not the "founder" of accounting; Webster's defines "to found" as "to take the first steps in building," and Luca Pacioli did not take the first steps in developing modern accounting. He is significant because he was the first person to write down what others were already doing, thus helping to standardize and disseminate best practices that were developed by others. He was emphatically not the first person to practice accounting, and to call him the "founder of accounting" is misinformation.

If you don't like the current phrasing, then please propose something here where it can be discussed. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 12:53, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

@Bryanrutherford0: You're right. It is thought that probably someone from the Ancient Rome founded works like accounting. However Pacioli is the first to have done a work on book-keeping. He is considered as the founder of modern accounting. The present sentence doesn't seem to be right. Therefore it needs to be modified. Now is you turn. --115ash^→(☏) 08:08, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

To be clear, what is it that you don't like about the current phrasing? He was a contributor to the field, certainly, and more than that, he made a seminal contribution (defined as "containing or contributing the seeds of later development; as 'a seminal book'"). His contribution made it possible for accountants across Europe to converge upon common standards and practices, thus enabling the field to professionalize. Would you prefer some other adjective? Could he have been a "key" contributor to the development of modern accounting? A "central figure" in the development of accounting? -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 13:05, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm going to have to revise the edit that was just made to the lede, because Pacioli was also clearly not the "final" contributor to the field of accounting; he lived centuries ago, and many others have contributed to accounting's development since. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 20:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

@Buswkycaveshottest:, the above thread shows that there is clearly no consensus to yours edits. Alex2006 (talk) 16:31, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Previous works

How much from the content of Pacioli's works can be attributed to predecessors like Fibonaci?--82.137.13.229 (talk) 15:25, 30 July 2017 (UTC)