User talk:Indraneel Rajeevan

On honesty
It is astonishingly dishonest to truncate the word "Occasionally" from the beginning of a sentence, as you did in this edit summary, since it (correctly) indicates that this usage should be rare and perhaps justified by special circumstances. This is supported also by When an ellipsis (...) is used to indicate that material is removed from a direct quotation, it should not normally be bracketed in the preceding section. --JBL (talk) 20:41, 14 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you for bringing this to my attention that citing established guidelines to merely surround an ellipis by square brackets as an attempt to provide more clarity to innocent readers can attract your testimonial to one's honesty.
 * It would still be "astonishingly dishonest" to truncate the entire remainder of the article and/or any subsection of the source while providing a citation (along your lines of reasoning) based on what portion is sufficient/insufficient to you, not the person providing citations in good faith. Unfortunately, I assumed reviewers like you are smart enough to recognize that the context, in terms of the article's subject domains, can warrant a positive interpretation of "Occasionally" in view of the fact that people, including, but not limited to, having a background in Algorithm Analysis (particularly, by means of Natural Language Processing), who are familiar with ellipsis being used in multiple ways, can comfortably distinguish it through the usage of square brackets in, and for, the matter of omission within direct quotation.
 * Nonetheless, as you rather seem to be interested in my honesty, I hereby offer you two exercises to assist your judgement:
 * 1> Wikipedia's Manual of Style has been suddenly edited to emphasize on "exceptional" usage of ellipsis that meets your agenda. Think.
 * 2> No undo summary has yet been provided for your conservation of the unnecessarily authoritative disposition at the article's closing statement. Think.
 * bonus> In our episode, who is actually being dishonest? Indraneel Rajeevan (talk) 23:26, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 2> No undo summary has yet been provided for your conservation of the unnecessarily authoritative disposition at the article's closing statement. Think.
 * bonus> In our episode, who is actually being dishonest? Indraneel Rajeevan (talk) 23:26, 14 April 2023 (UTC)