DOC: Fix quotes position in Series docstrings

[charlesdong1991]

• [ ]xref DOC: Fix quotes position in Series docstrings #24059
• tests added / passed
• passes git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff
• whatsnew entry

[charlesdong1991]

It's not done yet... for some, i did change the docstring, and i expect the output to change correspondingly, but result doesn't.. still need to find where the problem is... e.g. pandas.series.dt.freq, if you could help point out where i did wrong, I will be appreciated a lot because i was afraid if my direction was wrong or not.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #24065 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 92.5%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #24065   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   92.31%   92.31%           
=======================================
  Files         161      161           
  Lines       51562    51562           
=======================================
  Hits        47599    47599           
  Misses       3963     3963

Flag	Coverage Δ
#multiple	90.71% <92.5%> (ø)	⬆️
#single	42.44% <48.75%> (ø)	⬆️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pandas/core/arrays/base.py	97.35% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/indexes/multi.py	95.51% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/dtypes/dtypes.py	95.59% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/plotting/_core.py	83.58% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/indexes/period.py	93.07% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/indexes/datetimelike.py	97.41% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/dtypes/base.py	100% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/plotting/_converter.py	63.67% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/series.py	93.68% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/indexing.py	93.87% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
... and 18 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 367efb2...16d3462. Read the comment docs.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #24065 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 92.5%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #24065   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   92.31%   92.31%           
=======================================
  Files         161      161           
  Lines       51562    51562           
=======================================
  Hits        47599    47599           
  Misses       3963     3963

Flag	Coverage Δ
#multiple	90.71% <92.5%> (ø)	⬆️
#single	42.44% <48.75%> (ø)	⬆️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pandas/core/arrays/base.py	97.35% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/indexes/multi.py	95.51% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/dtypes/dtypes.py	95.59% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/plotting/_core.py	83.58% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/indexes/period.py	93.07% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/indexes/datetimelike.py	97.41% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/dtypes/base.py	100% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/plotting/_converter.py	63.67% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/series.py	93.68% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
pandas/core/indexing.py	93.87% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
... and 18 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 367efb2...16d3462. Read the comment docs.

[jreback]

@datapythonista is there a lint rule to enforce this?

[datapythonista]

yes, we've got GL01 and GL02 in the validation script for that. But we'll be able to have in the CI after a follow up issue of this one, as the issue was to fix around 50% of the cases. This will be the case with several of the issues, and my plan is to fix all them to be able to validate the errors in the CI. So, you can leave it with me, I'll ask to add the validation in the issues where this is possible.

[datapythonista]

lgtm, thanks a lot for working on this @charlesdong1991

It's not something to address in this PR, but I created #24068 to avoid adding the \n to the _field_accessor parameters.

[charlesdong1991]

@datapythonista yeah... indeed, i was thinking to add line breaks for docstring f.__doc__ = docstring directly in _field_accessor function, but looks it couldn't solve all errors... since i found out some of error are due to lack of docstring in some methods...

[datapythonista]

We'll focus on the special cases once we have the rest fixed. There were around 250 wrong cases of the error you've been fixing. I'll open an issue for the remaining once this is merged.

[jreback]

thanks @charlesdong1991

[charlesdong1991]

@datapythonista ok, i could push the new change for the _field_accessor to solve the issue you mentioned above if you want. i had the change in the local, i didn't add it since i was not sure if it's what you want...

[datapythonista]

sure, can you open another PR for it? And if you can check the the calls to _field_accessor and make sure all the line breaks (and spaces at the beginning or the end) are removed, that would be great. The issue is #24068