I disagree. In the example, account 4402278 is a resource represented at /accounts/4402278; actions on that resource should be performed … on that resource, no

I disagree. In the example, account 4402278 is a resource represented at /accounts/4402278; actions on that resource should be performed … on that resource, not on some other resource (e.g. all accounts, at /accounts). This also gives increased future-proofing, since someday one might have uncloseable accounts; those accounts could still live under /accounts, but would simply have no /close endpoint (as opposed to having /accounts/close, which sometimes works and sometimes doesn't).