Change a granular_scopes history item from GitLab 19.5 to 19.6

What does this MR do?

The history item that !260958 (merged) added to Create a personal access token for a user in doc/api/user_tokens.md says the granular_scopes parameter and response attribute were introduced in GitLab 19.5. During review it looked like !260958 (merged) would make the 19.5 cut, but it merged on 2026-10-13, after 19-5-stable-ee was cut from master, and it was not backported. This MR changes that item to GitLab 19.6 and changes nothing else.

The evidence:

• At the v19.5.0-ee tag, POST /users/:user_id/personal_access_tokens still requires scopes and takes no granular_scopes, and so does the head of 19-5-stable-ee (2230fbf1). It also presents the new token without the option that adds granular_scopes to the response, so the response attribute is new in 19.6 as well. On master it takes one of the two.
• 19-5-stable-ee branched from master at 1cf78572 (2026-10-12), and its first release candidate, v19.5.0-rc42-ee, was tagged on 2026-10-13 at 12:30 UTC, five hours before !260958 (merged) merged. The merge commit of !260958 (merged), 34b909bf of 2026-10-13, is not in that branch or in any tag.
• !260958 (merged) reached GitLab.com production on 2026-10-14, and GitLab.com runs 19.6.0-pre.

The other granular_scopes history items on the page stay as they are: the two that say GitLab 19.2, which !260958 (merged) also added, date changes that shipped in 19.2, and the four that say 19.5 date changes that are in v19.5.0-ee.

!260958 (merged) is on the 19.5 milestone for the same reason. It should read 19.6, and I can't change it, so could a reviewer move it?

Related issues

Related to #630541 (closed)

Related to !260958 (merged)

Author's checklist

• Optional. Consider taking the GitLab Technical Writing Fundamentals course.
• Follow the:
  • Documentation process.
  • Documentation guidelines.
  • Style Guide.
• If you're adding a new page, add the product availability details under the H1 topic title.
• If you are a GitLab team member, request a review based on:
  • The documentation page's metadata.
  • The associated Technical Writer.

If you are a GitLab team member and only adding documentation, do not add any of the following labels:

• ~"frontend"
• ~"backend"
• ~"type::bug"
• ~"database"

These labels cause the MR to be added to code verification QA issues.

Reviewer's checklist

Documentation-related MRs should be reviewed by a Technical Writer for a non-blocking review, based on Documentation Guidelines and the Style Guide.

If you aren't sure which tech writer to ask, use roulette or ask in the #docs Slack channel.

• If the content requires it, ensure the information is reviewed by a subject matter expert.
• Technical writer review items:
  • Ensure docs metadata is present and up-to-date.
  • Ensure the appropriate labels are added to this MR.
  • Ensure a release milestone is set.
  • If relevant to this MR, ensure content topic type principles are in use, including:
    • The headings should be something you'd do a Google search for. Instead of Default behavior, say something like Default behavior when you close an issue.
    • The headings (other than the page title) should be active. Instead of Configuring GDK, say something like Configure GDK.
    • Any task steps should be written as a numbered list.
    • If the content still needs to be edited for topic types, you can create a follow-up issue with the docs-technical-debt label.
• Review by assigned maintainer, who can always request/require the reviews above. Maintainer's review can occur before or after a technical writer review.