Does a reference declaration introduce a new name for the referent?

Question

In this question we've learnt that RVO cannot be applied to an expression like p.first.

In comments it was also suggested that RVO is generally not applied to an expression like r after a declaration like auto& r = p.first. It is less clear whether the standard mandates this behaviour.

in a return statement in a function with a class return type, when the expression is the name of a non-volatile automatic object (other than a function parameter or a variable introduced by the exception-declaration of a handler ([except.handle])) with the same type (ignoring cv-qualification) as the function return type, the copy/move operation can be omitted by constructing the automatic object directly into the function's return value

In the following code, is r a name of the object also known as o, to the extent that RVO is permissible when it forms the expression in a return statement?

int o = 42;
int& r = o;

Answer 1

CWG #633 addressed the fact that references, unlike objects, didn't have actual names. It was resolved by N2993, which extended the notion of a variable to encompass references, thereby giving them names.
Now [basic]/6 reads (all emphasis by me):

A variable is introduced by the declaration of a reference other than a non-static data member or of an object. The variable's name denotes the object or reference.

The name of a reference denotes that variable - the reference - not the object that the reference refers to. Although references are commonly explained as being "other names of objects/functions", in standard terms that definition is plain wrong.

I.e. copy elision is not applicable in your example.

---

Since the above paper was not adopted until 2009, and you tagged c++03: One can consider the paper as a retrospective correction of C++03. However, in C++03, strictly speaking, a reference is not an entity (this was rectified by CWG #485) and therefore the identifier in its declaration is never treated as a name (see [basic]/4, a name must denote a label or entity) - hence copy elision doesn't apply, again.