There is always a bibliography in a research article, for each quoted paper there is plenty of information (title, authors, year, journal, etc..) and this is very convenient for the reader.
But in the article itself, those articles are always named using the author(s) name(s) rather than their title. An example with this randomly chosen paper :
This is very common, at least in computer science and math. I think it's not a good practice because it's what has been found which is important and not who has found. It would be better use articles titles, if someone needs the authors names he can look at the bibliography.
I assume that titles are well chosen and give a good first idea of the contents, but anyway it can not be more meaningless than authors names.
Someone can argues that name is often shorter than title. I think it's not a good point because sometimes there are three or four names and because we could just use the bibliography reference number in order to be as short as possible, but it's not the aim of an article.
The same occurs with theorems and algorithms names. It's quite difficult to memorize what Kosaraju algorithm is, it would be much more easier to memorize what double traversal algorithm is.
Furthermore, science is timeless and this intrusion of a temporal thing is very unaesthetic.
On the other hand, don't be mentioned by other scientists could be less stimulating for authors. In addition, it could be difficult to find meaningful and short title for each article.
So, is using author name in order to refer to an other research article a good practice ? The idea is to complete my pros and cons lists and then possibly to conclude.