I voted “yes” for the edits in question. I don’t pretend my opinion is a final Truth, it is just an opinion.
We have here 3 related, but distinct entities: tracks, recordings and works.
Tracks are related to a particular release. As such it makes sense to enter them as printed, with exception of obvious typo or factual errors. In case of factual errors (for example, a wrong catalogue number) I usually enter corrected data as a track title, and left an annotation explaining why the track title printed on the CD cover is wrong. The latter (correcting factual errors) is not covered by the style guide, but until now it was never voted down by other editors.
Works are independent of any release, they are related only to the composer. Here the primary source are catalogues and printed score. There could be some corner cases, for example whether a comprehensive catalogue or a first edition has a precedence if they contradict each other, but in most cases the consensus about the work name is clear.
This leaves us with the recording name, and this is the tricky one. On one hand, recording represent tracks which may appear on different releases under different track names. On cover of one release opus numbers are printed, on another not; the track name on one release is in English, on another in French, on third in Russian, on fourth in Chinese. On the other hand, a recording represents some work. The relationship between recordings and works is also not always one-to-one: there are cases when a recording contains multiple works, and other cases when a recording contains just a part of a work. Especially for operas partial recordings are pretty often, and for some composers like Wagner, where the composer himself did not provided any small parts, each release splits works on recordings differently.
There is no specific classical style guide how to choose names of recordings. I agree with @takerukoushirou that if there is no specific style guide, than the generic style guide applies: “The recording title should generally be based on the titles of tracks using that recording”. In the case described above there was just one track for the recording, so the recording name shall be identical to the sole track name. As a consequence, I voted “yes” for the changes.
An alternative rule “base recording name on the work name” with extensions for partial or combined recordings is definitely possible, but it is not covered by the current style guide.