I thought the same thing at first reading of the title but the wording involved has a subtle distinction. A "naked singularity" is a term which has been defined by physicists for a while and is, as you stated, a singularity in space-time which does not have an event horizon around it, or would be if such a thing can exist, which is currently undecided. The presence of an event horizon is what makes a black hole (things go in, nothing comes out [minus Hawking radiation, I know]). The term "naked black hole" seems to be a term just made up by the author of the linked article or somewhere back in the reporting chain and has no formal definition, as far as I know, but is highly misleading. I would say that whoever made up that term "naked black hole" is not very familiar with the field of gravitation or they would have avoided this confusing construction. Speaking of confusing, the last time I posted something involving General Relativity, I screwed it up; hopefully this time is better.