I don't think we should do comparisons like this with other features in blender in the manual.

I really like the FAQ!

However I think that it should be in the manual and not link to a website.
This way the FAQ will always be the correct one for the blender manual version in question.

Perhaps we can have a FAQ section here instead?
But I'm not sure if we have any policy about this.

Do we have and rules about adding FAQ sections to the manual @Aaron Carlisle (Blendify) ?

options -> option

Also I don't thinks mentioning "industrial softwares" here is relevant.
It doesn't matter where the imported geometry is from. What matters is that the imported geometry had their edges split so two edges occupy the exact same space.

So I think this should be:

This option allows overlapping edges (e.g. from an edge split modifier or imported geometry where two edges occupy the exact same space)

a occlusion -> an occlusion

You do not mention that the occlusion bits are from the face material.
I think you should mention that here.

If use Bake Line Art(All), all
Should be:
Bake Line Art(All) bakes all

baked stroke -> baked strokes

I'll leave it as is for the moment until we have a better solution :D

I'm not sure about the English grammar here... Can you say "edge angles"? Can a edge have an angle? How best to describe it?

FAQ is still not in the manual but linked to an other webpage...

Solutions are being implemented at the moment.

I think it probably should be:
There are plans to remedy this in the future, but this is a known limitation for now.

This explanation for how it works when "match output" is off is quite confusing.

I would replace:

Otherwise, a single Target is required to receive the weight info, if multiple
weights are present, the higher one will be stored in Target.`

With:

If Match Output is off, then a Target vertex group has to be specified.
If there are multiple weight groups copied into Target, then the highest weight value is copied into it.

I would move this explanation into it's own Target section.

So you would have Filter Source, Match Output and Target.

Child object can have line art :ref:lineart_object-usage value overriding collection's setting.

Should be:

Child objects of the collection can override this setting if they wish in :ref:lineart_object-usage.

the evaluation will take much longer.

extra \

I think a different format for these lists is usually used, like this:

Type
   :Attribute:
      Use the values from the attribute to move each point by a different amount.
   :Float:
      Use a single value to translate every single point. This is a shortcut for assigning the same value
      for the X, Y, and Z components of the vector input, and allows adjusting the scale in a uniform way.
   :Vector:
      Use a single vector to translate every single point.

Only one empty line is necessary between properties.

threashold -> threshold

particles and other instanced objects Particles are not a type of instanced object, I'd change it to "particle instances", though I'm not even sure talking about particles is necessary.

has -> have

I still think you shouldn't refer to these as "bits" in the UI or the manual. Now I don't think they're called bits in the UI, seems like the manual should reflect that.
In the UI they are called "Masks" plural, I think that would work here.

Extra "all"

will get -> will be

extra -> manually

I think that's clearer in this case.

I don't think we need do be documenting defaults.