No problem with this, and no need to revert any change. I don't think I originally added the tag 'Verge' in the first place (at least, it doesn't sound like the kind of thing I'd do). As far as verifiability goes, yes I do know what OSM guidelines say; I think my point was that sometimes it's not obvious how to verify some feature names (and another mapper may not always understand why a specific name was given). In this case, this is a really small change and I agree that 'verge' is not really appropriate here. I'm not sure why any usage would lead back to this changeset; your message was just a bit confusing!

Fair enough, although I can't see (from a brief look through) where I've added any fictional names in this changeset — again, you'll need to be more specific if you believe this changeset introduces something unverifiable or provably false. If you can highlight specific things that should be updated then I'll be happy to change them (I've been focused on getting the area surrounding Southwell and Farnsfield as accurate and complete as possible, particularly as a resource to visitors and walkers — it was in a sorry state until fairly recently but it's always a balancing act between detail and usability as a map).

If you're just generally requesting that non-verifiable tags should be removed from this area, then there may be better places for that discussion.

Regarding your specific example, I don't think I've ever tagged anything as a 'verge' as I don't think that has much meaning, although I may have edited a feature that already had this tag without noticing.

Having said that, as far as giving things names goes, I'm not sure a feature's name has to be verifiable by somebody passing by. For example, you might find it hard to confirm that 'The Amphitheatre' at The Minster School has that name without seeing the original plans, internal school documents or communication with parents or students. There are no signs saying 'The Amphitheatre' which would allow a passer-by to locate it; it can only be verified by specific sources that may not be available to the general public.

Similarly, if there's a feature in a village known locally as (for example) 'The Verge' then I feel that this should be probably tagged as such. It would be a shame to be so pedantic as to wipe a name from the map because it can't be 'officially' verified and lose something that may have a deep heritage through verbal history. Clearly there's a difference between 'The Verge' and 'a verge', though, and I appreciate that there's a fine line where preserving an unofficial name by adding it to a map makes it unintentionally more official. The difference between 'common' name and 'official' name (if any) probably needs highlighting in some cases but (as with so many things in OSM) it's a judgement call and the kind of thing that should be discussed specifically against as specific changeset.

"Remove fiction names"? What on earth does this mean? What 'fiction' names? (And what are 'fiction names' anyway?) Where? Can you be more specific?

The Southwell Trail is entirely based on an abandoned railway - there's no section of the trail doesn't run along an old rail route. The main West-Southeast route was part of the Midland Railway and the most northerly section near Bilsthorpe was where it transitioned into LM&SR / LNER routes. The trail is a continuous route, not comprised of separate parts - it runs six feet from my house and I spend a lot of time on it, so it seems odd that it was previously broken into individual sections on OSM. If there's strong disagreement then I've no problem rolling any changes back but the Abandoned Railway/Bridleway designation does seem apply to the whole thing. As far as I know it's not classified differently depending on administrative areas, but I can check with the Friends of the Trail if necessary.