Thanks for all your answers!
@271828
I'll try to rework the introduction. It is still a challenge to find a catchy yet precise intro, I probably went too far ^^.
@IceBreakerSours
The matrix inversion is a good point, but in my opinion it is a software implementation topic. Here I just wanted to lay down the math, without entering into the implementation details.
You are right about Hamilton's principle. I'll manage to add this precision.
About your last remark, I am not sure that talking about stress based FEM can bring value to the reader without confusing him. I have to think more about this.
I'll take the time to read your reference. I think it can fit perfectly as a link somewhere. Thanks!
And sorry for the typos. I tried to do my best, but I can't hide the fact that I am not a native english speaker

. I'll reread again the article.
@rb1957
No problem, feedback is always welcome.
The aim of this article is to provide enough detail to make it a good starting reference. But without providing too much to avoid confusing the reader.
From my point of view there should be no target audience. Obviously when you end up reading this article you are not interested about engineering stuff but about math and numerical method. The target audience is whoever wants to read about this subject.
Your suggestion is another approach to introduce the subject. It focuses on the engineering side of FEM, which is not the viewpoint I took.
@rscassar
I plan to write another article about the practical implementation of the method (at least the stiffness computation) using a Python script. I'll let you know when it is ready.
-----
Ali