Reidgreg

Joined 11 March 2016
m
3000 edit / 6 month update
(2000 edit update)
m (3000 edit / 6 month update)
{{userspace notes}}
{{userpage bar}}
 
{{Trout me}}{{Extended confirmed topicon}}{{WikiGnome topicon}}
 
{{WP:Keep It Simple/tray top}}
{{User:PC-XT/KIS/Wikipedia related|DGAF}}
{{WP:KIS/label |tgt=WP:JACK|tgtname=W:WWJD?}}
{{User:PC-XT/KIS/Wikipedia related|TROUT}}
{{WP:KIS/label |tgt=WP:CRAZYTEST|tgtname=WHT:226}}
{{WP KIS}}
This user endeavours to be kind and to appreciate kindness from others, but does not presume to tell others to "be kind." This user tries to follow [[meta:The wiki way|the wiki way]] and the precepts of [[WP:DGAF]]. If misbehaving, this user may be (virtually) whacked with a trout.
 
As of 1718:4700, 68 AugustSeptember 2016 (UTC), this user's edits have been distributed 9291% to articles, 43% to article and user talk pages, 23% to projectscategories and portals, 1% to userspace/sandboxesprojects, 1% to templates, and 1% to templatesuserspace/sandboxes.
 
{{clear}}
{{clear}}
 
This user has been [[Wikipedia:THANK|thanked]] ninesixteen times, once for every 4650 edits (excluding typo fixes which received thanks once in 840325 edits).<!-- Approx 196/400 + 505/600 + 976/1000 + 921/1000 edits were typo fixes. Non-typo fixes 323402 of 20003000 edits.--> These were for acts of kindness on talk pages<!-- one gentle witticism, and one thanks for offering thanks-->, article contributions<!--providing a statistic and noting its relevance for inclusion, and rephrasing a summary to reduce word count without sacrificing content-->, supporting talk page discussions<!--providing statistics on reliable source use of competing terms, and adding to a Request for Discussion on GMO's-->, and proactive technical contributions<!--noticing a complaint and inserting wikicode on several pages to prevent reoccurrence, and fixing a search string on a wikiproject-->.
 
This user has had edits [[Wikipedia:Reverting|reverted]] three times. Once was a good faith error the other editor self-corrected. The other two reverts, by the same user on the same article, were re-included (in the other editor's phrasing) following discussion.