diff --git a/docs/source/frequently_asked_questions.rst b/docs/source/frequently_asked_questions.rst
index 2cc82761..7c247205 100644
--- a/docs/source/frequently_asked_questions.rst
+++ b/docs/source/frequently_asked_questions.rst
@@ -1,27 +1,32 @@
 FAQs - Frequently asked questions
 =================================
-| **Q:** How do I know what order to put the parameter values in the pytorch
-  tensor which gets passed to the simulator?
-| **A:** If you are using any ``Module``` object (so a simulator), then you can
+
+**Q:** How do I know what order to put the parameter values in the pytorch tensor which gets passed to the simulator?
+-----------
+
+**A:** If you are using any ``Module``` object (so a simulator), then you can
 get the parameters using ``print(simulator)``. The order of the dynamical
 parameters (top to bottom) corresponds to the order you should use in your
 parameter value tensor. Note that you can ignore the static parameters.
-| **Q:** Why can I put the lens redshift at higher values than the source
-  redshift or to negative values for some parametric models?
-| **A:** We can calculate everything for those profiles with reduced deflection
+
+**Q:** Why can I put the lens redshift at higher values than the source redshift or to negative values for some parametric models?
+-----------
+
+**A:** We can calculate everything for those profiles with reduced deflection
 angles where the redshifts do not actually play into the calculation. If you use
 a profile defined by the lens mass, like a NFW lens, or a Multiplane lens then
 it does matter that the redshifts make sense and you will very likely get errors
 for those. Similarly, if you call the ``lens.physical_deflection_angle`` you
 will encounter errors.
-| **Q:** I do (multiplane-)lensing with pixelated convergence using the
-  pixelated kappa map of a parametric profile. The lensing effect differs from
-  directly using the parametric lens. Why is the lensing effect different?
-| **A:** Since you do pixelated convergence your mass is binned in pixels in a
-  finite field of view (FOV) so you are missing some mass. At the limit of
-  infinite resolution and infinite FOV the pixelated profile gives you the
-  parametric profile. If the difference is above your error tolerance then you
-  have to increase the resolution and/or FOV of your pixelated convergence map.
-  Especially for SIE or EPL profiles (which go to infinity density in the
-  center, and have infinite mass outside any FOV) you will miss infinite mass
-  when pixelating.
+
+**Q:** I do (multiplane-)lensing with pixelated convergence using the pixelated kappa map of a parametric profile. The lensing effect differs from directly using the parametric lens. Why is the lensing effect different?
+-----------
+
+**A:** Since you do pixelated convergence your mass is binned in pixels in a
+finite field of view (FOV) so you are missing some mass. At the limit of
+infinite resolution and infinite FOV the pixelated profile gives you the
+parametric profile. If the difference is above your error tolerance then you
+have to increase the resolution and/or FOV of your pixelated convergence map.
+Especially for SIE or EPL profiles (which go to infinity density in the
+center, and have infinite mass outside any FOV) you will miss infinite mass
+when pixelating.