Correct example sketch names

[per1234]

What This PR Changes

The content refers to various example sketches that can be accessed via the Arduino development tool interfaces. Some of these references used incorrect names for the example sketches or their parent menu paths.

References:

• https://github.com/arduino-libraries/WiFi101/tree/0.16.1/examples/SimpleWebServerWiFi
• https://github.com/arduino-libraries/MKRNB/tree/1.6.0/examples/Tools/ChooseRadioAccessTechnology
• https://github.com/arduino-libraries/WiFiNINA/tree/1.8.14/examples/SimpleWebServerWiFi
• https://github.com/sandeepmistry/arduino-CAN/tree/0.3.1/examples/CANReceiver
• https://github.com/sandeepmistry/arduino-CAN/tree/0.3.1/examples/CANSender
• https://github.com/arduino-libraries/Arduino_Pro_Tutorials/tree/v1.0.6/examples/Creating%20a%20Flash-Optimised%20Key-Value%20Store/FlashKeyValue
• https://github.com/CyberonEBU/Cyberon_DSpotterSDK_Maker_33BLE/blob/1.0.5/library.properties#L1 / https://github.com/CyberonEBU/Cyberon_DSpotterSDK_Maker_PortentaH7/blob/1.0.5/library.properties#L1 / https://github.com/CyberonEBU/Cyberon_DSpotterSDK_Maker_RP2040/blob/1.1.0/library.properties#L1 / https://github.com/CyberonEBU/Cyberon_DSpotterSDK_Maker_NiclaVision/blob/1.0.5/library.properties#L1
• https://github.com/arduino-libraries/Arduino_BHY2Host/blob/1.0.8/library.properties#L1
• https://github.com/arduino/ArduinoCloudProviderExamples/tree/1.2.1/examples/AWS%20IoT
• https://github.com/arduino/ArduinoCore-mbed/tree/4.0.10/libraries/PDM/examples/PDMSerialPlotter
• https://github.com/arduino-libraries/Arduino_GigaDisplay_TinyGL/blob/0.0.1/library.properties#L1
• https://github.com/arduino/ArduinoCore-arc32/tree/2.0.6/libraries/CurieIMU/examples
• https://github.com/arduino/arduino-examples/tree/1.10.1/examples/01.Basics/Blink
• https://github.com/arduino-libraries/Robot_Control/blob/1.0.4/library.properties#L1
• https://github.com/arduino-libraries/Robot_Motor/blob/1.0.3/library.properties#L1
• arduino/ArduinoCore-mbed@95ceb2d

Contribution Guidelines

• I confirm that I have read the contribution guidelines and comply with them.

[jhansson-ard]

To me, it looks good, but the approval review should come from the maker content and pro content people, I've also tagged @jcarolinares here since there was one example from Opta ⭐

Thank you, @per1234!

[jacobhylen]

Looks good from Maker side ✅

[per1234]

@jacobhylen would you mind providing an approval via the GitHub pull request review system?

https://docs.github.com/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/about-pull-request-reviews

The repository is configured to require PR approval via the review system so this is required from a technical standpoint even though an approving comment is equivalent from a human perspective.

[jhansson-ard]

@per1234 we are waiting for the review of @jcarolinares before we merge, I think maybe that's why @jacobhylen didn't approve through the system :)

[jcarolinares]

Hello,

First of all thank you for the PR @per1234 , really appreciated.

Please take a look at my review, I suggested some changes and generated a jira ticket for one of them (I suggest to simple remove that change, we will take care of it in the task)

Please take a look and don't hesitate to contact me in case you need it! Thanks!

[jhansson-ard]

@per1234 it seems like there are some conflicts that need to be resolved before we can review and approve this PR, can you take care of them? 🙏🏼

[jhansson-ard]

And then we are also waiting for @jcarolinares's approval 🙏🏼

[per1234]

it seems like there are some conflicts that need to be resolved before we can review and approve this PR, can you take care of them?

Yes, I will take care of them, but I will only do it after I get an approval because at the rate this thing is moving it would only be a waste of my time to do it now since there will likely just be more conflicts by the time I manage to obtain an approval.

[jcarolinares]

it seems like there are some conflicts that need to be resolved before we can review and approve this PR, can you take care of them?

Yes, I will take care of them, but I will only do it after I get an approval because at the rate this thing is moving it would only be a waste of my time to do it now since there will likely just be more conflicts by the time I manage to obtain an approval.

Hello @per1234

Let's put the following statement clear:

I'm not going to approve a pull request without having the conflicts solved, so I can see what are the changes that will be finally applied to the actual documentation.

It is not a good practice in software development, and it is not a good practice here.

"To not waste your time" I've tried to help you solve the conflicts by myself, but I cannot do it because the branch of the pull request comes from a fork of this repo inside your personal github https://github.com/per1234/docs-content

That is ok and I get why are you doing it, but it is just not necessary and complicates things without need. Please clone and commit to this repo next time, you should have permissions, in case you don't contact me and Josephine to give you the right permissions to it, so we can jump to the branches and help you change things that are important for the review in case we need.

This review is finished but not approved until we fix the conflicts, once you have it please ping me or @jhansson-ard to approve and merge.

[jcarolinares]

This review is finished but not approved until we fix the conflicts, once you have it please ping me or @jhansson-ard to approve and merge. Please read full explanation from above comment