Hi, Say we want to supply a generic plot() in a package with a simple class, like this: ---<--------------------cut here---------------start------------------->--- setClass("track", representation=representation(x="numeric", y="numeric")) if (!isGeneric("plot")) { setGeneric("plot", function(x, y, ...) standardGeneric("plot")) } setMethod("plot", signature(x="track", y="missing"), function(x, y, ...) { plot(x at x, x at y, ...) }) ---<--------------------cut here---------------end--------------------->--- To document the new method, I thought argument 'y' shouldn't need to be documented in the package because it's declared 'missing', and the following in plot-methods.Rd would be ok: ---<--------------------cut here---------------start------------------->--- \name{plot-methods} \docType{methods} \alias{plot-methods} \alias{plot} \alias{plot,track,missing-method} \title{Methods} \description{A plotting method} \usage{\S4method{plot}{track,missing}(x, \ldots)} \arguments{ \item{x}{track.} \item{\ldots}{Arguments passed to \code{\link{plot}}.} } \section{Methods}{ \describe{ \item{plot}{\code{signature(x="track", y="missing")}: some plot.} } } \keyword{methods} ---<--------------------cut here---------------end--------------------->--- yet 'R CMD check' issues a warning: ---<--------------------cut here---------------start------------------->--- Codoc mismatches from documentation object 'plot-methods': \S4method{plot}{track,missing} Code: function(x, y, ...) Docs: function(x, ...) Argument names in code not in docs: y Mismatches in argument names: Position: 2 Code: y Docs: ... ---<--------------------cut here---------------end--------------------->--- So it seems as if I'm asked to document the generic, not the particular method. What am I misunderstanding? Thanks. Cheers, -- Seb