I think this is a CPython issue. We subclass datetime.datetime, and don't override strftime.

In [9]: pd.Timestamp.strftime is datetime.datetime.strftime
Out[9]: True

@TomAugspurger So how does the doc page for Timestamp.strftime() get generated?

So how does the doc page for Timestamp.strftime() get generated?

The docstring is inherited as well, so pd.Timestamp.strftime.__doc__ is the docstring of the stdlib (which is not very informative).

We could override the method just to add a more elaborate docstring.

I think we'd have to also make sure it picks up the parameter correctly. If you look at the current doc, it doesn't indicate that format is a parameter to Timestamp.strftime() .

Is this possibly an issue with how the methods for datetime.datetime are picked up when we build the docs for Timestamp, and when this happens, we aren't picking up the parameters correctly?

That's again still an issue with datetime.datetime, which simply has no information about its arguments (eg inspecting the signature of it will fail), and which we inherit