I have this problem with organic chemistry more broadly. On the one hand, I understand that rattling off the IUPAC name of a compound is much less concise and harder to get right than just saying the brand name or chemical name (which, for pharma, is often just as bullshit of a name as the brand name). On the other, you come across names like the Eschenmoser-Claisen rearrangement vs the Johnson-Claisen rearrangement, or the Suzuki vs Stille vs Negishi vs Kumada vs Hiyama/Denmark vs Sonogashira* cross couplings. Each set consists of fundamentally the same reaction with slight variations in the specific reagents. Just saying e.g. "organozinc" instead of "Negishi" would be so much more descriptive. The authors' names often aren't even that helpful in an attributive sense. For instance, some of the cross couplings were actually first reported by someone else in that list (though IIRC everyone got at least one), and most of the chemists published work on at least one of the other reactions at some point.

* Okay fine Sonogashiras are a little different what with the copper co-catalyst, but still, same mech at Pd.