This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
People may also be interested in knowing how he become a famous historian, although his degrees were in economics. A brief discussion is needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qx2020 (talk • contribs) 04:38, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In the preface of book adaptation of Ram Guha's thesis - "The Unquiet Woods: Ecological Change and Peasant Resistance in the Himalaya (Oxford India Paperbacks),1991" Guha mentions -
Second, I am not a historian but a sociologist trying to write history. This is a work of historical sociology, in which I am, as compared to most historians, more consciously theoretical and comparative in my approach. Here I am on slippery ground, for historians have in general a sharp scepticism of the pretensions of sociologists.
I recommend changing it to popular historian. 103.199.180.107 (talk) 20:37, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Any Objections? Mixmon (talk) 16:38, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On the one hand, we have an IP who, drawing on their
own research, feels that we can't call him a historian. On the other hand, the article says he has been a chaired professor in history and one of three Indian historians who are members of the American Historical Association. Unfortunately the weight associated with "historian" far exceeds that of "popular historian" so, with apologies, this is not going to change. --RegentsPark (comment) 17:21, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
@
pointy response to the classification of Vikram Sampath as a popular historian. Nonetheless, I agree with you. TrangaBellam (talk) 18:53, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply
