<blockquote>
  <p>What is the proper balance between question &amp; title specificity?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>In <a href="https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1479/how-to-ask-a-good-question-on-crossvalidated">this answer</a>, there is some guidance about writing titles. The item number 2 says:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Keep the title short: it's not necessary to explain the question in the title, but what it is about without being too broad.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>A key part is 'the title should express what the question is about'.</p>

<p>The original title of that question was:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Linear regression with sine/cosine elements</p>
</blockquote>

<p>It does not reflect what the question is about, because the connection between 'linear regression' and 'sine/cosine variables' is empty. </p>

<p>The suggestions of <code>Glen_b</code> and <code>user777</code> add the term 'transformation' to improve the connection between the method (linear regression) and the data (sine/cosine transformed variables): </p>

<p>Glen_b suggested:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Linear regression with transformed $x$ values</p>
</blockquote>

<p>user777 suggested:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Linear regression with x values under trigonometric transformation</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Both are better than the original title. Note that the four points made in Glen_b's answer here would still be applicable under user777's title suggestion:</p>

<ol>
<li>The answer <a href="https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1390/how-should-questions-be-answered-on-cross-validated">answers the original poster's question</a>.</li>
<li>The general part of the answer emphasizes the sine/cosine transformations are irrelevant to the specific issue raised by the OP.</li>
<li>Other questions with the same reasoning, but with different examples of transformation could still be marked as duplicates.</li>
<li>3 won't let 4 happen.</li>
</ol>
