No-one will tell the difference between that and Redbook CD quality in a double blind test. For recording, and intermediary files, sure, knock yourself out. For the final master 16/44.1 is plenty.
It is nice to have a final mastered render in that high bit/sample rate around for future reference.
In this day and age where we regularly resample, re-edit and generally stretch, bend and chop finished tracks, particularly during live performance, it can make a difference. There is a need for it, albeit quite a specific one.
EDIT: Also any masters you send to cutting/pressing houses will be re-mastered per medium. So the cutting house will do a vinyl master, a CD master and so on. Vinyl has very specific needs[1] and so there will be many layers of processing AFTER the artist has finished their mastering process. This will benefit from a high bit/sample rate input.
Yes, obviously vinyl introduces all of its own (delicious) noise and distortion. However we don't need the vinyl distortion and aliasing of the digital waveform as well. The latter is avoidable.
Yes, as the article points out, if you don't go mad and apply far too much compression like so much recorded music does. Over compression is hideous...
I compress individual drum/synth tracks through 'insert' channels. All my mixing is done in the analogue world, and only finally goes into my Emu 0202. I used to compress finished tracks, but I have the attitude that people can apply their own compression. But me compressing individual tracks is fine.
As to why I need that resolution, my ancient analogue synth can sound good at that high resolution.
As for distribution, I just post FLAC files to my website.