Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Adam Turner <9087854+AA-Turner@users.noreply.github.com>

Author: encukou

peps/pep-0793.rst

@@ -433,9 +433,9 @@ It should be moved to a HOWTO in the documentation.
    Make sure that it does not use its second argument (``PyModuleDef``),
    as it will be called with ``NULL``.
    Instead of the argument, use the existing ``PyModuleDef`` struct directly.
-#. If using multiple ``Py_mod_create`` slots, consolidate them: pick one of
+#. If using multiple ``Py_mod_exec`` slots, consolidate them: pick one of
    the functions, or write a new one, and call the others from it.
-   Remove all but one ``Py_mod_create`` slots.
+   Remove all but one ``Py_mod_exec`` slots.
 #. Make a copy of the existing ``PyModuleDef_Slot`` array pointed to by
    the ``m_slots`` member of your ``PyModuleDef``. If you don't have an
    existing slots array, create one like this:
@@ -591,13 +591,14 @@ important. So, it might be OK to leave this to a later change.
 Footnotes
 =========
 
-.. [#multiexec] A `quick survey <https://github.com/python/peps/pull/4435/files#r2105731314>`_
-   of multiple ``Py_mod_exec`` slots found zero uses in the top 15,000 PyPI
-   projects, and three in the stardard library (including tests for the
-   feature).
+.. [#multiexec] A `quick survey`_ of multiple ``Py_mod_exec`` slots found zero
+   uses in the top 15,000 PyPI projects, and three in the stardard library
+   (including tests for the feature).
    The easy workaround is consolidating the ``exec`` functions; see
    :ref:`pep793-porting-notes` for details.
 
+   .. _quick survey: https://github.com/python/peps/pull/4435#discussion_r2105731314
+
 
 Copyright
 =========