"An evaluation of MongoDB 4.2.6" might be neutral and informative enough I suppose.
But then again ultimately the blame is on the author of the article, it's a terrible title for this type of articles. I can understand if the moderators here don't want to go through the trouble of dealing with editorialized titles (with all the controversies it could generate) when clearly the original author didn't care enough to come up with a decent title.
Why? His site is about evaluating distributed data stores. In context of his site, that title makes perfect sense, HN should just add the missing context to its title.
Because as can be seen from the fact that most people only found this article because it was posted on HN (and not because they were browsing the site), the context of the overall site isn't super relevant.
Site context isn't a given when most of us are finding content via 3rd party sources.
But then again ultimately the blame is on the author of the article, it's a terrible title for this type of articles. I can understand if the moderators here don't want to go through the trouble of dealing with editorialized titles (with all the controversies it could generate) when clearly the original author didn't care enough to come up with a decent title.