This seems to be one of those non-converging title sequences because no option satisfies everyone.

We eventually changed it to "Oscar Zariski was one of the founders of modern algebraic geometry", even though this omits the anecdote which the thread is mostly about. People won't miss that if they see the article's own title though.

Could you cite the guideline? I couldn't find it; I thought the idea is to use the original title where possible.

> Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.

And in this case, it seems misleading and definitely clickbait. The quote at the end doesn't support the claim that he forgot anything.

The citation (https://books.google.com/books?id=9zu0BQAAQBAJ&pg=PA33&lpg=P... ) doesn't support the claim either. It sounds more like the story was: While waiting for his wife to arrive at their wedding ceremony, he stepped away and passed the time by working on a problem.

Oscar Zariski - forgot about his own wedding is the original title on the article.

The title I objected to was "A man who forgot about his own wedding". This title was actually edited to make it more clickbaity before it was later edited to be less clickbaity.

It's literal clickbait as you're moved to click to figure out who that man is.

This isn't clickbait in the slightest, this low level obsession with labeling anything that isn't entirely descriptive as clickbait is obnoxious.

Not every article title has to be "A 500 word blog post on Oscar Zariski, covering years 1899-1960, published May 26th 3PM EST, by Boogie Math"