Various docstring fixes
- [x] xref #27976
- [x] tests added / passed - Didn't run all tests, only those concerning the issue (`./scripts/validate_docstrings.py pandas.Series.drop --errors=PR02`)

- [x] passes `black pandas` - Only docstrings were edited, so there were no major changes 
- [x] passes `git diff upstream/master -u -- "*.py" | flake8 --diff`
- [ ] ~~whatsnew entry~~ -  Not needed, only docs changed
General fixes to the documentation in different places. I discovered that the root of many of the conflicts lies in decorators. We might need to re-evaluate how we're getting the signature of functions in the validation script. 

First time submitting a PR! Let me know if I need to do anything, or if there's anything I should do differently next time :)
Oh, uh - I guess this PR re-does what [mine did](https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/28742) - plus additional stuff. No sense merging both, so looks like this one might be a superset of mine. So much for my first PR on pandas... 😞 Sorry, I didn't see yours until after I had committed the overlapping
changes. There's still more than a few that look like simple formatting
errors if you want to go after those. I'm going to start looking into the
issues with decorators.
Don't feel disheartened, my work wasn't any more valuable than yours.

On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 11:23 AM Angela Ambroz <notifications@github.com>
wrote:

> Oh, uh - I guess this PR re-does what mine did
> <https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/28742> - plus additional
> stuff. No sense merging both, so looks like this one might be a superset of
> mine. So much for my first PR on pandas... 😞
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/28744?email_source=notifications&email_token=ACT76UTP2DHUISSB4XZSH7LQMS4HVA5CNFSM4I4RUVZKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEAFEO3I#issuecomment-537544557>,
> or mute the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACT76US5D7W4EIHUZ5TPTU3QMS4HVANCNFSM4I4RUVZA>
> .
>


-- 
Sincerely,

*Nathan Abel*
Kettering University - Computer Science
989-780-3050
 Thanks for the follow-up. Yeah, it's hard to find unclaimed work on these projects. (I've been looking here and on scikit-learn.) I'll take a look at the remaining stuff. 👍 


 I'm not sure why the Travis CI build failed. Could I get a pointer on how to fix it, or was the code not at fault? Hello @Nabel0721! Thanks for updating this PR. We checked the lines you've touched for [PEP 8](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008) issues, and found:











There are currently no PEP 8 issues detected in this Pull Request. Cheers! :beers: 

##### Comment last updated at 2019-11-08 03:21:11 UTC I'm going to start looking into fixing the validation script so it catches more of these properly, since the correct format for the docs is to have args and kwargs in the same line. Can't look now, but I think there is an issue for it. I think this (#20298) is it. If you'd like I can comment on there with this issue. There's another part I'd like to fix as well, which I commented about in #27976. Sure, will be great to see both fixed. This is ready to be merged, I have the changes to the validation script in a separate pull request, since it addresses a different problem. Issues are fixed. Thanks for working through this with me! Just saw that you also looked at the other PR and requested that it was split on "," there. I'll work on that and get these fixed back to how they were before.  @Nabel0721 can you merge master for this now the other change is in? Yes, it says there are no conflicts. Would you like me to rerun the checks? I'm not sure how I'd do that. If you can merge master and repush would be ideal @Nabel0721 do you have time to commit the last changes?

And next time it'd be better if you leave checked the checkbox to let maintainers commit to your branch, and we could do it ourselves.

Thanks! I got really busy unexpectedly, so I don't think I'll have time for a couple more weeks. I do think I have the "allow edits from maintainers" checkbox on, so I'm not sure why it's showing up as off on your end. If you are able to make edits though, feel free. Nice PR but sounds like it is stale (or at least will be for the foreseeable future).

@Nabel0721 ping if you'd like to pick this back up and can reopen Yeah, my apologies. I’m not going to be able to get to this for a while.
I’ll be sure to ping if there’s an update.

On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 7:05 PM William Ayd <notifications@github.com> wrote:

> Closed #28744 <https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/28744>.
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/28744?email_source=notifications&email_token=ACT76UWBBBVR7LTRSKCNXVDQSSUN5A5CNFSM4I4RUVZKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFWZEXG43VMVCXMZLOORHG65DJMZUWGYLUNFXW5KTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOUXDNNGY#event-2781271707>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACT76UTH7RIBWJPLBE77W6TQSSUN5ANCNFSM4I4RUVZA>
> .
>
-- 
Sincerely,

*Nathan Abel*
Kettering University - Computer Science
989-780-3050
 @Nabel0721 the only thing pending is literally clicking on the `Commit suggestions` buttons in this comment: https://github.com/pandas-dev/pandas/pull/28744#pullrequestreview-302294656

We can't do it ourselves (github issue, or you didn't allow maintainers to edit this PR). If you can spend one minute doing that, we can merge this changes. Sorry, I didn't know I could do that. I would have done it a while ago if I had known. It must be a github issue that you can't do edits though. I checked again and the allow edits checkbox is still checked. Sorry for how long this has taken to finish up, but thank you for being patient. For sure. It's always nice to get to work on python code. Great thanks @Nabel0721 and @datapythonista 