---
name: wp-writing-style
description: Use when drafting or polishing a World Politics manuscript so it reads across cases, follows the World Politics house style, and fits the limits (≤ 12,500 words including notes and references; abstract ≤ 150 words; online supplement ≤ 15 pages). Manuscripts are double spaced with the word count indicated and anonymized for triple-blind review. Tightens prose and format; it does not invent content.
---

# Writing Style (wp-writing-style)

A World Politics article must read for a **comparative-politics and IR audience that works on other
cases**, follow the **World Politics house style** (author-date), and respect the word limit. This
skill is about reaching across cases and respecting the format — not about generating claims.

## When to trigger

- Drafting the introduction, framing the contribution, or final polish
- Over the word limit and needing to cut without losing the argument
- Writing the **≤ 150-word abstract**
- Aligning citations/headings/format to the World Politics Style Sheet before submission

## Reach across cases

1. **Front-load the contribution.** By the end of the introduction the reader knows the question, the
   argument, the evidence, and **why it matters beyond your cases**. A comparativist working on other
   countries — or an IR scholar — should see the stakes quickly.
2. **Define case-specific terms.** Spell out country/region-specific institutions and acronyms; do not
   assume area expertise. State scope conditions so readers know where the argument applies.
3. **Argument-first prose.** Lead with claims; use evidence to support them. Avoid "the data show…"
   without saying what they show and why it matters across cases.
4. **Signpost.** Clear section structure so a reader can follow theory → design → findings.

## Format to World Politics house style

- **Citations**: author-date per the **World Politics Style Sheet**; keep one consistent style (manage
  with Zotero/BibTeX). Notes and references **count** toward the word limit.
- **Manuscript**: **double spaced**, word count **indicated** on the text.
- **Anonymize**: World Politics is **triple-blind** — remove bylines and any identifying information;
  remove self-citations where possible; strip identifying file metadata.
- **Abstract**: **≤ 150 words**, stating question, approach, and findings.

## Fit the limits (≤ 12,500 words incl. notes and references; tables/figures/appendixes excluded)

- Tighten **notes and references** — they count toward the 12,500.
- Move balance tables, full specs, and extended robustness to the **online supplement (≤ 15 pages)**.
- Cut throat-clearing and literature dumps; engage the debate, not every paper (see
  `wp-literature-positioning`).
- Prefer one decisive figure to three redundant tables.
- A revised article may exceed the limit **only** if the growth results from responding to reviewers.

## Anti-patterns

- A single-case-insider intro that never states why the argument travels
- Burying the contribution in the middle of the paper
- An abstract over 150 words or one that hides the findings
- Forgetting that **notes and references count** toward the 12,500 words
- Self-references or acknowledgments that break triple-blind anonymity

## Prose-objection patterns and the venue-specific fix

Because the reader works on other cases, the writing objections at World Politics are about
accessibility and front-loaded stakes, not grammar.

| Referee objection | The fix this skill drives |
|-------------------|----------------------------|
| "Had to dig for the contribution" | Front-load it: question, argument, evidence, and why it travels by the end of the intro |
| "Assumes area expertise" | Define country/region-specific institutions and acronyms; state scope conditions |
| "Over the word limit" | Tighten notes and references (they count); move robustness to the ≤15-page supplement |
| "Abstract hides the findings" | State question, approach, and findings within 150 words |

Calibration anchor: write for a methodologically plural comparative-and-IR readership and clear the
broad-significance bar early — the venue values a big political question over narrow empirics.
(House-style and limit specifics are volatile; confirm against the style sheet.)

## Style execution pass for World Politics

Run this as a concrete capability pass. First lock the political mechanism, case scope, evidence warrant, and comparative or international implication; then test whether the manuscript addresses comparative and international politics reviewers who expect a big political question, credible evidence, and theory that travels beyond one case.

- **Primary move:** Rewrite the opening and transitions so the venue-level claim, evidence object, and contribution are visible before technical detail; keep house-style limits tied to the source map.
- **Decision ledger:** return `claim / evidence / blocker / next edit` rows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly.
- **Sibling comparison:** compare against International Organization for IR institutions/political economy, Journal of Politics for wider political science, Comparative Political Studies for comparative breadth; if the neighboring outlet has the stronger audience claim, recommend re-routing before polishing.
- **Verification floor:** before submission-ready advice, re-open `resources/official-source-map.md` for volatile rules and name the one unresolved fact that could change the recommendation.

## Output format

```
【Contribution stated by end of intro?】[Y/N]
【Reads across cases?】case-specific terms/acronyms defined; scope stated? [Y/N]
【Abstract】word count (≤150)
【Word count】≤ 12,500 incl. notes + references (tables/figures/appendixes excluded)?
【House style + double spaced + anonymized】[Y/N]
【Next】wp-transparency-and-data-policy
```

## Supplementary resources

- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — word/abstract limits, house style, double-spacing, anonymity