thats complete nonsense as we know that all batteries benefit from being cycled more shallow. The only exception here is if the car lets you charge to 100% so if you charge it everyday it ends up sitting at 100% most of the time.
It's much more nuanced than "shallow cycles" are best - besides cycle-life-depth-of-discharge aging, you also have calendar life aging. Most battery cycle life tests are run continuously (charge-discharge with little to no rest in between), but in real life, cars sit idle for the vast majority of the time.
A typical car might spend 5% of it's time actually driving. 95% of the time, it's parked. My car also spends about 5% of their time charging (average speed driven is close to charging speed).
Due to this, capacity loss due to calendar aging appears to cause the majority of capacity loss except in high mileage cars. To reduce this, you need to do two things: keep the battery cool and keep the batter at lower states of charge.
Aside from parking in the coolest spot you can find, the only other thing you can do is keep the battery's state of charge as low as possible. Note that some claim that very low SOC is also bad, but there are some conflicting studies out there - others say that < 10% is best for calendar life - it might depend on chemistry.
Ideally, you would only charge only as much as needed to get to your next charge. You would also time it so that you finish charging just before you need to drive. This would combine shallow cycles with low average SOC - the best of both worlds.
In real life, though, people are lazy. For example, I compromise on this and typically charge to anywhere between 50-70% for most of my daily driving, then charge up again between 20-40%. For infrequent road trips I'll charge to 90-100% as needed. With this my average SOC is 40-45% - mainly because the car still ends up sitting a lot at 50%+ SOC.
