External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Donggongon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:43, 15 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Proposed merge of Penampang into Donggongon edit

Same entity (describe capital of Penampang District) angys (Talk Talk) 05:36, 12 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

@*angys*: Confusing, there are two separate wikidata entries too which split up different language wikis: Wikidata:Q989415 and Wikidata:Q778171. The Penampang article is older (and has more interwikis), which may affect the best direction of merging. It's also the more well-written. However, that would make the history annoying if we then moved the combined page to Donggongon. CMD (talk) 07:57, 11 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
Support merge, but with Penampang being the target - it seems to have a slightly broader scope, and is indeed better written. The merge process, properly done, maintains attribution and history, so I don't think that this problematic. Klbrain (talk) 13:13, 25 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
    Y Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 04:17, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply