This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Technology This redirect is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history Associated task forces: /  Military science, technology, and theory task force

This looks like a good article, but it seems that much information has been pulled from personal knowledge or experience. This article really needs some sources. JWAbrams (talk) 16:00, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article first suggests that the members of the sniper team switch positions in order to avoid fatigue, but then goes on to point out how spotter's roles are often ignored, and that spotters are often the smarter, more experienced of the team. This doesn't seem to be a neutral way of observing things. TransNique 10:58, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't it be a "tactical objective" at the end of the first paragraph? Somehow I can't see snipers going for strategical objectives in average missions (other than being air dropped on the enemy's capital to assassinate their leader).--Cancun771 (talk) 13:02, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That depends, their task might not involve shooting anyone. A sniper team can be very useful in an ISTAR network, and their task could be strategic. Tactical still probably fits better though. Geoff B (talk) 14:54, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend that the link to a spotter be removed or updated. It makes little sense to me to have an article link to itself. 173.3.19.113 (talk) 08:04, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Per a request from 2013,[1] I merged this article into Sniper#Sniper teams. The merger request was never discussed, but seemed logical. I have no objection to splitting the material back into a standalone article, but it shouldn't be done until references can be added. Rezin (talk) 20:39, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]