| 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
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
