---

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 — word/abstract limits, house style, double-spacing, anonymity