I suggest changing the title to something more relevant, like the title of the preprint [https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.04297 https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.04297], may

I suggest changing the title to something more relevant, like the title of the preprint [https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.04297 https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.04297], maybe: "AT 2023clx: the Faintest and Closest Optical Tidal Disruption Event Discovered" As an aside, I'm saddened to again realise phys.org is pretty bad at reporting, like look at this: > Using mainly the Las Cumbres Observatory Global Telescope network (LCOGT) and NASA's Neil Gehrels Swift Observatory, they conducted follow-up observations of AT 2023clx—a transient source initially identified in 2014. That aside is just completely wrong: as indicated explicitly in the name, AT 2023clx was discovered in 2023, TDE's were firmly detected before 2014, and NGC 3799 was obviously discovered before being included in the original release of the New General Catalog (NGC) in 1888. I have no idea what that last bit is supposed to mean. Then there's this bit where the author "translated" a factor of 10^42 into gibberish: > Furthermore, the maximum blackbody luminosity of AT 2023clx was found to be only 4.56 tredecillion erg/s.