Deletion of Philosophy of Accounting

Comment: I've taken the initiave to clean up the article considerably, removing the (often incorrect) philosophical biolerplate, the empty citations of standards documents without connection to the philosophical issues announced in the lead, and so forth.  I've placed some '''key''' citation-needed tags to request citation of the key claims which go to the root of the question of this article's suitability for the encyclopedia.  Especially, we need a citation for the claim that the substance-over-form question is of philosohical import, and the claim that the rules for reporting raise epistemological concerns.  What is needed here--'''let me be perfectly clear'''--is not an argument that they are connected (that would be |original research, but rather, a citation to a secondary |verifiable source which asserts the connections in question
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:V)

Comment: There do indeed appear to be authorities who have sought a philosophical dimension to this field, and its ethical and representational problems.  This article is a start, and there's |no hurry
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:There is no deadline (WP:DEADLINE)