>> an analysis of existing links has shown that most of its uses can be replaced.

>Oh? Do tell!

They do. In the very next paragraph in fact:

   The guidance says editors can remove Archive.today links when the original 
   source is still online and has identical content; replace the archive link so 
   it points to a different archive site, like the Internet Archive, 
   Ghostarchive, or Megalodon; or “change the original source to something that 
   doesn’t need an archive (e.g., a source that was printed on paper)

Well, that's an odd idea of "can be replaced".

> editors can remove Archive.today links when the original source is still online and has identical content

Hopeless. Just begs for alteration.

> a different archive site, like the Internet Archive,

Hopeless. It allows archive tampering by the page's own JS and archive deletion by the domain owner.

> Ghostarchive, or Megalodon

Hopeless. Coverage is insignificant.