freebeer
Unfortunately, all three sections were edited 11 months ago, and the TIGER reviewed=no tags were removed with corresponding changeset comment.
So perhaps the different naming went unnoticed at the time...
From my on-the-floor remote perspective, given that one spelling is used for a short length between two other identical spellings of longer segments, I would tend to believe in majority rule, ...
Then I would pull out the dreaded Search Engine to attempt to analyse the frequency and likelihood of both results (trying to figure out if `Isled' all trace back to Census origin, f'rinstance).
Even better would be to have house numbers mapped, particularly on the short section where at most four buildings might bear the name in question, to localise the search results for both alternatives.
But that is all just armchair research, no substitute for a Local to pound pavement.
Thanks for pointing out all these inconsistencies, easily overlooked by even a local mapper, or not obvious when reviewing existing data and removing the reviewed=no tags (which I never touch in my remote other-side-of-the-world mapping) even after adjusting geometries, for this very reason.
(mutters to self about all these bug-reports I see with different spellings, not mentioning whether a typo is at play, or carelessness at work, myself often overlooking the difference until too late)