Yeah, well, it wasn't.
These are certainly undesirable or neutral:
rename RHEL6/input/checks/{yum_gpgcheck_never_disabled.xml => ensure_gpgcheck_never_disabled.xml}
rename RHEL6/input/checks/{accounts_nologin_for_system.xml => no_shelllogin_for_systemaccounts.xml}
In many ways the OVAL titles were more desirable than the XCCDF ones from an organization/naming perspective, but it's hardly a big deal. In any event, we should probably have a discussion to hash out some kind of naming strategy, if you think it's important. In any event, I think everyone seriously appreciates the OVAL QA that accompanied this!
Relatedly, is there any use for the description text in the current OVAL definitions? I believe it's just XCCDF description and could be added back in during the linking phase (occupied by a placeholder until then if it's a necessary element for the schema during the unit testing).
I also think changes to the template scripts in checks (which now generate some fixes) should instead have been done is a separate new directory for templated fixes in input/fixes/bash. Or possibly entirely auto-generated from a comment or note field in the OVAL checks. But it's fine for now, and we can improve it later. Refactoring is fun too.