You don't half see some crap on here about shooting manual and how you should do so to give full control of your image. Baloney!
If you are not in manual, the camera is clearly making some of the decisions for you, so you cannot by definition be in `full control` of your image.
Very few photographers have the ability to look at a scene, judge the light, and decide what combination of aperture/ISO/shutter speed will give them the perfect exposure as well as the depth of field/amount of motion blur required in their image.
I would say that all good photographers are capable of doing exactly this. This ability - and the time and practice they put into acquiring these skills- is what makes them good photographers.
Most will require some sort of meter reading to give them a starting point, and I would guess that most will use the meter built in to the camera rather than a seperate one. So already we are in the realm of relying on our camera to do some of the work for us.
ALL, not most, shots need a meter reading unless you are letting the camera decide, rather than you telling the camera what
you want. The in-built meter is fine in most circumstances. I have not used a hand-held for years. Of course we rely on the camera to do some of the work. A camera is a tool. A chef uses an oven to create food, but does not let it decide how to cook the meal.
At this point, having taken a meter reading and dialled in the required settings, how many will then chimp the histogram after taking a shot to check that they are within the parameters of what they are hoping to achieve? More reliance on their camera's abilities.
.
Don't get this bit at all. Of course you should check that the shot you have taken is OK. A glance at the telemetry is sensible. What is your point here?
At this point I would say that shooting manually like this is no different to dialling in your ISO setting and an aperture (if shooting in AV mode), taking a shot, and then adjusting the exposure with EC after checking the histogram. Shooting in auto mode like this will give most the control they need over depth of field, whilst allowing the camera to make adjustments to the shutter speed if the light should change slightly. If the light should change drastically, or the tones of the subject should change to the point of affecting the meter reading, it's a fairly simple matter of re-checking the histogram and changing the EC to suit.
Making adjustments to ISO, aperture, EC and other settings are what I would term `manual adjustments`. This is not automatic shooting.
If someone shooting manually decides that they want to shoot at f/4 to give the depth of field they require, ISO of 100 to give the best quality with minimum noise, they are going to have a limited amount of leeway over what shutter speed they choose in order to avoid over or under exposing the shot.
This is fundamental to all photography. Again, what is your point? If the lighting and other conditions don't allow the shot you want, you must alter some variable to obtain the shot. If there are not enough variables, you will not get the shot.
I maintain that there is no difference for someone shooting on auto selecting the same aperture and ISO, and allowing the camera to select the shutter speed, providing the appropriate metering mode is being used and/or EC is used to allow for tricky lighting conditions and/or subject.
If you are
manually selecting aperture and ISO and so forth, you are not shooting in auto. However, by allowing the camera to make some of the decisions - such as shutter speed - you are in danger of not getting the shot you are hoping for. Why not use all the functions that came with your camera? I will use some automated functions in certain circumstances because it allows me to get better shots.
But my first choice, and I believe that of the overwhelming majority of pro photographers, is to use manual wherever possible.
Most people I know either use Ap/S settings in most situations, and only switch to fully manual when they are taking their time and really considering a photo. 
