[no QA] Docs updates for E/A#101090 document Reimbursable lock in Edit multiple

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

Help site follow-up for Disable Reimbursable in Edit multiple when a selected expense is locked (Expensify/App#101090).

That PR added disabled: isFieldDisabledForAnyTransaction(CONST.EDIT_REQUEST_FIELD.REIMBURSABLE) to the Reimbursable row in the Edit multiple panel, so the row is now greyed out when any selected expense has a locked reimbursable value — for example an expense on a report closed with Mark as done on a Submit and Close Workspace. Before the fix the row stayed tappable and the change was silently dropped.

docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Edit-Expenses.md documented the general rule ("If editing is not allowed on a field for any of the selected expenses, that field will not be available for editing") but never mentioned Reimbursable, so a user who hits the greyed-out row has nothing to search for. This PR makes that case explicit:

• Adds Reimbursable to What expense fields can be edited, which previously listed Amount, Description, Merchant, Date and "Other fields like Category, Tag and Attendees".
• Adds an FAQ entry, Why is the Reimbursable field greyed out in Edit multiple?, covering the locked-expense case and the separate case where the row does not render at all (Workspace Rules fixing the value for cash expenses, company card expenses, invoices, and personal expenses sent to someone). Those two cases are distinct in the code — areSelectedTransactionsReimbursable hides the row, the new disabled prop greys it out — so the article keeps them separate rather than merging them.
• Adds a closing sentence to the existing Why are some fields not editable in the Edit multiple panel? FAQ telling the user to deselect the restricted expense.
• Extends keywords and internalScope for retrieval on phrases like "reimbursable greyed out".

UI labels used in the article (Reimbursable, Edit multiple, Mark as done, Rules, Spend, Expenses, Done, Paid) were checked against src/languages/en.ts for exact capitalization. No new article was created and no existing headings were renamed, so the structure still satisfies docs/HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md (single # title plus # FAQ, question-form FAQ headings) and docs/HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md (bold, UI-exact labels, no quoted labels).

npm run spell-changed passes on the changed file.

Fixed Issues

$
PROPOSAL:

Documentation-only follow-up, so there is no issue for this PR to close. Source PR: Disable Reimbursable in Edit multiple when a selected expense is locked (Expensify/App#101090).

Tests

// TODO: The human co-author must confirm the wording matches current behavior before marking this PR as "ready for review".

Suggested check, using the steps from Expensify/App#101090:

1. Create 2 expenses as 2 separate reports on a Submit and Close Workspace, then mark one of them as done.
2. In the navigation tabs, go to Spend > Expenses, select both expenses, click Selected, and choose Edit multiple.
3. Verify Reimbursable is greyed out, matching the new FAQ entry.
4. Select only the expense that is still open and verify Reimbursable is enabled.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Not applicable. This PR only changes Markdown in docs/articles, which has no offline behavior.

QA Steps

// TODO: The human co-author must fill this out before marking this PR as "ready for review". This PR changes help site Markdown only, so it may qualify for [No QA].

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
• I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
  • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
• If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • A similar style doesn't already exist
  • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
• If new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
  • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
  • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
• If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
• If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

---

@suneox, please review the files changed and confirm they reflect the current behavior. Then post a new comment saying @MelvinBot mark this PR as ready for review.

[stephanieelliott]

No update needed on this, per tightened Melvinbot criteria (see https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/685679). Feel free to reopen if you disagree!