Docs - Update Docs to Show Permission Requirements for Different media Types

[zachdotai]

Why:

Closes: This is in response with an issue that I was facing and managed to resolve by finding this discussion.

What's being changed (if available, include any code snippets, screenshots, or gifs):

Updated the media type section of the documentation to outline that different media types may require different permissions.

Check off the following:

• I have reviewed my changes in staging, available via the View deployment link in this PR's timeline (this link will be available after opening the PR).

  • For content changes, you will also see an automatically generated comment with links directly to pages you've modified. The comment won't appear if your PR only edits files in the data directory.

• For content changes, I have completed the self-review checklist.

[welcome]

Thanks for opening this pull request! A GitHub docs team member should be by to give feedback soon. In the meantime, please check out the contributing guidelines.

[github-actions]

Automatically generated comment ℹ️

This comment is automatically generated and will be overwritten every time changes are committed to this branch.

The table contains an overview of files in the content directory that have been changed in this pull request. It's provided to make it easy to review your changes on the staging site. Please note that changes to the data directory will not show up in this table.

---

Content directory changes

You may find it useful to copy this table into the pull request summary. There you can edit it to share links to important articles or changes and to give a high-level overview of how the changes in your pull request support the overall goals of the pull request.

Source	Preview	Production	What Changed
rest/using-the-rest-api/getting-started-with-the-rest-api.md	fpt ghec ghes@ 3.13 3.12 3.11 3.10 3.9	fpt ghec ghes@ 3.13 3.12 3.11 3.10 3.9

---

fpt: Free, Pro, Team
ghec: GitHub Enterprise Cloud
ghes: GitHub Enterprise Server

[nguyenalex836]

@zachdotai Thanks so much for opening a PR! I'll get this triaged for review ✨

[skedwards88]

Thanks for this PR! This is something that we should fix internally. I'll raise this discrepancy with the team that owns the data from which the permission docs are generated.

[zachdotai]

Thanks for this PR! This is something that we should fix internally. I'll raise this discrepancy with the team that owns the data from which the permission docs are generated.

@skedwards88 Thank you for your response. As far as I understand from the author of the earlier discussion, the issue could not be resolved back then in 2022 due to Github not having the capacity to do it.
I think this small comment in the docs will go a long way in saving some precious time for the engineers who can be stuck on the issue while it is resolved by Github. We can caveat the comment with this note as well. What do you think?