ID tips are useless in front of a good, comprehensive identification guide. Probably added this because they just wanted to avoid guides*. A species wiki for each species would be better than a Wikipedia page on the species page.
* It’s an opinion. I have seen enough criticism on guides that say that iNat and especially iNatters who do not want to do the effort are certainly not interested in the development of guides. Most of the local guides are better off as lists. Guides should be strictly for identification guides and FWIW the introduction is terrible; Guides ideally should have nothing to do with local fauna, even if it is the Serengeti, or your local park, we need identification guides for new identifiers. Those are way more useful. We need to inform all those users who have made “useless” guides without any additional data etc. to just make a list instead. There is a big problem here.
ID tips can cover species with observations on iNat, while guides can cover any species. They can include illustrations from papers and what-not. There are several factors that give guides a win over identification tips, if iNat tries to improve them.
I may have lost some modesty/crossed some guidelines here, pardon me for that, I have not noticed anything wrong in what I wrote yet, so do inform me if you see anything.