Three questions from a beginner. Asking is faster than searching in the manual. I ask for your indulgence 
if I have many (unsorted) documents in a folder and I create a new one, it appears at the end (last). Is there a way to create it under the currently selected one?
How can I move a document up/down with the keyboard?
What are the shortcuts for these arrows?
Thanks!
No, you canât create a document in an unsorted position. The new document will alwasy be created at the bottom of the item list.
You canât move a document up or down the item list via keyboard. Itâs a drag and drop operation.
The arrows are for navigating backwards and forwards through locations youâve viewed in that window. The shortcuts are Command-[ and Command-].
May I ask, especially as you are a self-confessed beginner with perhaps some preconceptions about DEVONthink, why sort order, and keyboard to move file names, in the view is so important to you. What are you trying to accomplish with this view of the file list? I canât ever remember anyone in this forum asking about that. (Probably missed it, but certainly unusual).
2. in some apps it works with ââ+arrow up/down. Wouldnât that also make sense for DT?
The request is noted with no promises. The only other discussion I know of is regarding moving items between groups, not in the sort order.
Thank you @BLUEFROG 
@rmschne You can ask what you want⌠where to start ⌠if you come from another app that works in a similar way, many workflows are pre-programmed in your head. DT does it differently, thatâs always the case and completely ok. No offense, but there are âsolutionsâ that I just donât understand. That may be me. But why is a document created at the very end? Who wants it that way? And thatâs just one example of many.
I can solve many things myself with BTT or KM. Example: There is no setting to search for word components. You have to type * before and after a word. However, a * is added virtually after a word as long as space is not typed. Am I the only one who finds this ⌠strange?
However, two things I asked for have already been implemented. Thank you very much for that.
You rather have others read the manual and provide executive summaries for you?
Aside: the forum has a search function, too. Not fast enough, either?
You donât have to answer me if you donât want to. 
But why is a document created at the very end? Who wants it that way?
Many, many people I would say.
Not everyone uses the Unsorted sort method. I for one rarely use it and usually only for a support purpose. I use Date Added > Descending 95% of the time. And in my case, the newly created documents appear at the top of the item list. 
With the myriad ways people do and can use DEVONthink, itâs impossible to assert one method as âthe expected wayâ over another. But as I mentioned, the request is noted.
Yes I am going to add to the point made by @rmschne. What do you want to do?
I do like my documents sorted in a non-alphabetical way. In fact according to most recent, or âflaggedâ. You can set a column to both those and then sort by those columns. I have a Keyboard Maestro short cut for that, I canât remember off hand how it works but I can look it up if you like. There are also âratingsâ, âlabelsâ and more that you can create columns for and sort using those. It is part of DEVONthink 3 's powers. There are also smart groups and search functions that can be set up and accesed quickly.
Then Iâm probably the exotic one. I adapt. However, one of DTâs strengths is its great flexibility in adapting to all users. Thatâs why the exotics tell the non-exotics what else would be possible. 
Thank you @tudoreynon I know all that. For certain projects, I want to organize documents in a spontaneous âvisuallyâ way. Itâs not a science, itâs my personal need.
Think about how youâd implement that kind of behavior.
Searching for the beginning of words is easy and fast with a word index. Searching for an arbitrary part of a word â not so much. The word index does not help much with that, and an index on arbitrary parts of words would be too large.
So, from an implementation PoV, its more sensible to have âWordstart*â as the default than âsomethingâ. And many languages do not run words together as German does, which makes the âarbitrary part of a wordâ request even less urgent.
I donât know if DTâs index works the way I assume.
Technically, you certainly understand a lot more than I do. Regarding speed: I do it this way and donât notice any significant slowdown. A * is automatically added to the beginning and end of every word I type. Scrivener does this by default, but it can be annoying because itâs not possible to change this behavior quickly. Everything has advantages and disadvantages 
I understand. I have to say I do sometimes have a few documents on Desktop that I do that with. Then I move them back into DEVONthink 3, or the final result as it were. Usually a pdf.
As a long-term user of both Scrivener and DevonThink, I think itâs important to remember that they are different applications with different goals. Scrivener is, IMO, unsurpassed for writing, and of course if you are assembling a book-length work the order of sections is extremely important. DT, on the other hand, is unsurpassed as a tool for storing and retrieving information, and in that application it very quickly becomes obvious that depending on visual order and âeyeball searchâ doesnât scale past a certain point.
âDonât see any significant slowdownâ is very much a function of the size of the database being searched. As a relatively new user, Iâm guessing that your DT database is not yet particularly large. My main working database is well north of 2 million words, and is actually on the small side of what youâll see here.
In my experience, DT and Scrivener complement each other very effectively, but neither is the ideal tool for all tasks.
Youâre right about everything ⌠and also not.
This assumes that you can find everything. And you can do that by searching with *. This function is already implemented in DT. So why shouldnât it be selectable as an option? You should be able to choose.
The possibilities for searching with Scrivener are comparable to those of DT. The difference is that DT is much faster with large amounts of data. And my database is 2 GB.
Iâm a bit confused by your comment, since you can do both those things in DT and @kewms comment stands.
I wrote a reply last night then decided not to get involved, but now itâs morning and Iâm commenting anyway so Iâm going to say what I wanted to say last night:
This is actually incorrect. If you have partial matches enabled (an optional setting) it does a partial match whilst you are typing, but once you hit return on your search it only searches the word as youâve typed it by default. If you want to search partial matches properly, you would need to add the wildcard option at the end.
In any case, for English (and French), adding a wildcard at the front by default seems like a redundant search most of the time, and itâs not how most digital searches work by default so isnât expected behaviour. Most searches assume the word you type in is the one you want to search for, they donât assume youâre typing a string of letters and then search for any occurrence. Itâs not how words are created in English (or French) and would be fairly useless as a search. Words that do have prefixes can be easily searched for by deliberately adding the wildcard when thatâs the case (which the user knows, since they know what theyâre looking for). The rest of the time, itâs simply not a needed function.
If I am searching for âpantsâ for example, I definitely donât want âparticipantsâ, âoccupantsâ, etc., to come up in a search by default (Iâm using this particular term as an example because an American publisher recently did exactly that for a find and replace of âpantsâ to âtrousersâ, and with inevitable consequenceâŚ).
I appreciate that German does follow logic rules that many other languages donât, so this search may be more useful for German language users.
The one language I know of where thatâs different is German. Here, âGartenâ can be part of âObstgartenâ and âKindergartenâ (though they donât harvest kids in the latter while they do harvest fruit in the former). We love to run nouns together, like in the (in)famous Donaudampfschiffahrtskapitän (who is the captain of a steam boat navigating the Danube). And German is very creative with verbs, too: there are âberatenâ (to advise), âverratenâ (to betray), âanratenâ (to suggest). Or âhingehenâ, âweggehenâ, âlosgehenâ, âangehenâ, âabgehenâ, âvergehenâ, âumgehenâ. Mark Twain hated those prefixed verbs.
While there might be a point for prefixed wildcards with German nouns, itâs utterly useless with verbs â their meaning can be changed completely by prefixes, so that searching for *gehen will turn up many wildly disparate hits.
I think thatâs an urban myth. No language follows âlogic rulesâ in the sense of Maths, as all grammar rules are distilled after the fact: They describe the usage, they do not prescribe [^1]. And if you ever have the chance to talk to a foreign language speaker learning German, youâll certainly not hear the word âlogicâ from them. âDas blaue Hausâ, âDes blauen Hausesâ, âDem blauen Hausâ, âDas blaue Hausâ (the four cases for a blue house in German) â there might be rules to it, but logic? And even our grammar changes over time
[^1] A Turkish friend once told me that his native language is âthe most logicalâ. He rescinded that proposition when he couldnât explain away all the exceptions that I noticed as a foreign learner.
@chrillek I confess to being a little surprised but all the more delighted by your knowledge of linguistics. 
Was ist eine Denkpause? Eine Pause vom Denken? Oder eine Pause, um nachzudenken? Wie du sagst, mit Logik hat das wenig zu tun.
I very much hope that everyone will see this discussion as a friendly exchange of different points of view. At any case, I would like it to be understood as such.
@MsLogica I could go into every detail again, but Iâd rather keep it simple. In many cases, perhaps in most, it may not serve any purpose to place an * before and after a word. But thatâs for me to decide. If I decide so, I have to put the * by hand. All Iâm saying is, an option that does that for me would be nice. Especially as DT can already do this. I have solved this for myself with a BTT macro. So, the matter has been resolved.
So youâre saying that because there are people who might use a certain feature incorrectly, itâs better not to have that feature at all? Then letâs just leave it all out. If you donât have anything, you canât use anything wrong ⌠that was overly ironic.