DEPR: deprecate Index.is_numeric
- [ ] progress towards https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/issues/50042
- [ ] [Tests added and passed](https://pandas.pydata.org/pandas-docs/dev/development/contributing_codebase.html#writing-tests) if fixing a bug or adding a new feature
- [ ] All [code checks passed](https://pandas.pydata.org/pandas-docs/dev/development/contributing_codebase.html#pre-commit).
- [ ] Added [type annotations](https://pandas.pydata.org/pandas-docs/dev/development/contributing_codebase.html#type-hints) to new arguments/methods/functions.
- [ ] Added an entry in the latest `doc/source/whatsnew/vX.X.X.rst` file if fixing a bug or adding a new feature.

@topper-123 hellow friend , i have changed all ``` is_numeric ``` . But it still have a check failing . I want to know where lead to this failing . Can you help me to pass this check ? Hi @ABCPAN-rank. Thanks for this. You're getting close. A couple issues:

1. You need to add a test add a test that this is deprecated, named `test_is_numeric_is_deprecated` or similar. Look at the other PRs how this is done.
2. The method is still used in some places, check the `Doc Build and Upload / Doc Build and Upload (pull_request) ` failures. Usage of this method should removed entirely from the code base, except from the test that it is deprecated.
3. You use `is_numeric_dtype(x) and not is_complex_dtype(x) and not is_bool_dtype(x)` consistently. Can you check if this is necessary or if this check should be relaxed in some places.

Can you look at the above, especially point 3. If those three checks in point 3 are really needed as much as indicated here, can you add a helper function in `pandas.core.dtypes.common` for this, so we only have to use a single function instead of 3.
 @topper-123 :
1. I think ```test_is_numeric_deprecated```which is same as other PR had been added in ```pandas/tests/indexes/common.py```.
2. I think all ```.is_numeric()``` was changed(__except test__) after i use ```git grep "is_numeric()"```.But check is failing.  at ```Doc Build and Upload ```  It have 5 warnings in ```Doc Build and Upload ``` . I cannot find the warning path  
3.```.is_numeric() ```(__Only real number__) is different from ```is_numeric_dtype()```(__including boolean and complex__) in number field. if we use ```is_numeric_dtype()``` instead of ```.is_numeric()```, we need a helper function . so what's name should be called about this helper function ? ```is_real_dtypes``` ?  1. Yes I had missed that, sorry
2. I looked at it, and I think it is is an external package that used the method (dask), so probably is ok as-is. I've restarting the doc build test, maybe the failure was a fluke and it'll pass on a second try.
3. Yes, but could you check if we really should check for bools and complex numbers in all those locations. it may have been done without considering the difference and now is a good time to check if using  `is_numeric_dtype` only is sufficient. If they're needed, `is_real_dtypes` is probably not a good name (complex numbers are not real as far as I remember my math), but e.g. `is_any_numeric_dtype` or similar is fine.
 @topper-123  ok, i will check it .
 But ```is_numeric()``` will return __False__  when index include complex or boolean. I think if we want to use a helper function instead of ```is_numeric()``` , we can use ```is_real_dtype()``` . Because ```is_numeric()``` is check real number in actually .It will return True when input is only ```int``` or ```float```. @topper-123 If I use a helper function to  instead of  ```is_numeric()```, should I write some tests for helper function? Where can write the tests? Or I can use old test about ```is_numeric()``` . No, That's not needed, this is just internal and very simple. `is_real_dtype` is not good for a name, if it's checking other types than real numbers. @topper-123 Ok i will write a helpful function called ```is_any_numeric_dtype``` .
Should I change ```doc/source/whatsnew/v2.0.0.rst``` for ```is_any_numeric_dtype```? > Should I change `doc/source/whatsnew/v2.0.0.rst` for `is_any_numeric_dtype`?

No, this should be a purely internal detail, so a whatsnew entry is not needed. Thanks @ABCPAN-rank. Very nice.