A list of books about the historical name of the church surely has little relevance to an article about an extant church?  

 And indeed, some histories use "Audeon". In the 18th century (1717) Nicholas Forster writes about a "Sermon preached in the Parish-Church of St Audeon, Dublin"; in 1906 Frederick Falkiner KC's "The Foundation of the Hospital and Free School of King Charles II" uses "Audeon"; and in 1913 the Parish Register Society of Dublin published a record of marriage entries from the parish registers of "St Andrew, St Anne, St Audeon and St Bride". As to the Bishop of Canea's Histories, I think he uses "Audeon", contrary to what you have said. Further, the church is known among Dubliners as "Audeon's". 

 I'm not going to insist on the use of "Audeon" in the place of "Audoen", but I think it would be worth while at least noting at the start of the article that the alternative usage exists. 

 Apologies for breaching a norm of behaviour - I am not a regular contributor, and I assumed that an edit accompanied by an invitation to undo it would be satisfactorily polite. 

 Salomoh