Yeah. And the exception (as a desktop user) - ArchLinux - really proves the rule here. I like Arch for a handful of reasons but the documentation is really the standout one.
But my experience with FreeBSD's docs are even better - and most of that experience is quite old at this point. I can't imagine how much better the situation has gotten since FreeBSD only seems to mature and not degrade (based on comments like yours which are very common).
I use Arch docs all the time, even for non-Arch distros. What really makes the wiki stand out is its focus on practical problems with examples, more than man-pages style docs. Is there anything similar for FreeBSD? I know the man pages are supposed to be amazing, but it's just a different problem to solve IMO.
I also seriously dislike the BSD's tendency towards making --help useless, forcing you to bring up the man page. This is just for practical reasons. It's easier to hit up arrow, dash dash help pipe less than up arrow, ctrl+a, man, alt+f, ctrl+k to kill the arguments you've already written :)
Man pages in OpenBSD for instance are a "must". In the GNU world, often man pages are really badly maintained pointing to GNU info. Also, the so called "Linux Howtos" were a disaster full of obsolete points.
Just compare the OpenBSDxy.html upgrading page (where m and n are release numbers) for OpenBSD releases (and the FAQ) to the Arch Wiki.
Man alive, OpenBSD's documentation is excellent. FreeBSD is good too, but there is just so, so much in the OpenBSD man pages.
OpenBSD also strikes a very good balance between "informative" and "terse" that should be held up as a model for others. Unfamiliar things may need a few readings to get everything, but it's all there without being a toilet-clogger.
But my experience with FreeBSD's docs are even better - and most of that experience is quite old at this point. I can't imagine how much better the situation has gotten since FreeBSD only seems to mature and not degrade (based on comments like yours which are very common).