Over the Word Limit After Revisions: What Journals and Conferences Allow

Usually yes, and at some journals it is stricter at revision than at first submission. A few venues add room in writing for reviewers' requests, and a few leave the final length to the editor. Where nothing is written, your decision letter and your editor set the rule. These are the rules on ten venues' own pages, read on 25 September 2026:

Conference rules are set year by year. These are the 2026 calls; check the call for the year you are submitting to.

JCO Journals do not check formatting at first submission, with one exception. In the journal's words: "Our only exception to this policy is the word limit." Even that exception has a margin: the body "may exceed the article type's word limit by no more than 1,000 words at initial submission". The margin ends at revision: "Upon submission of a revision or prior to acceptance, all articles must meet the article type's word limit."

That changes the arithmetic. If you used the margin at first submission, your revision starts up to 1,000 words over before you add anything the reviewers asked for.

JCI's short format has the same 1,200-word maximum, references included, at first submission and at revision. It is the revision instructions that say what happens to a Research Letter over it: "Adherence to word limits and figure size is a requirement for the Research Letter format. Revisions will be returned upon submission of the manuscript to address these issues." Full research articles at JCI have a recommended length of 9,000 words and a maximum of 12,000, also counting references, figure legends and tables.

Some conferences plan for the revision to grow. The ACL 2026 and EMNLP 2026 calls use the same sentence: "Final versions of accepted papers will be given one additional page of content (up to 9 pages for long papers, up to 5 pages for short papers) to address reviewers' comments."

That page is for the final version of an accepted paper. A paper revised and resubmitted through ACL Rolling Review is still held to the 8- and 4-page limits, and the ARR call is blunt about those: "Submissions that exceed the length requirements, or are missing a limitations section, will be desk rejected."

ICML 2026 gives accepted papers the same extra page: "The final versions of accepted papers will be allowed one extra page for the main paper." ICLR 2026 raised its limit earlier, during review: "During the discussion/rebuttal phase and for the camera ready, the page limit will be increased to 10 pages to allow for new results/discussions. This limit will be strictly enforced." The next sentence says what that means: "Papers with main text beyond the page limit will be desk-rejected." The extra page is the whole allowance.

Physical Review Letters works differently. Besides the 3,750-word core, a Letter can carry "up to two pages of appendices or other content—called End Matter", and "End Matter does not count against the core length limit." If you need more than that, you can ask: "Authors may request a waiver for 1/2 page or more for either the core of the paper or the End Matter." In deciding, editors weigh whether "there is a clear need for the room" and whether the result "is of extreme importance or interest", and "decisions on such waivers are not subject to appeal."

At two of these journals the final length is settled with the editor rather than on a page. Nature gives print lengths as averages, then adds: "However, the final print length is at the editor's discretion." Its "editors provide detailed advice about the expected print length when asking for the final version of the manuscript." Nature Communications is relaxed at first submission ("Within reason, style and length will not directly influence consideration of a manuscript") and says that "If and when revisions are required, the editor will provide detailed formatting instructions at that time."

Circulation works the other way round. It publishes a maximum for every article type, 4,000 words for Original Research and 800 for a Research Letter, and its revision page adds that "Authors should adhere to any formatting requirements or requests made within the decision letter." The decision letter's requests come on top of the published limit, not instead of it.

So read the decision letter first. If it gives a length, that is your limit. When this question came up on r/PhD in September 2026, two researchers said a line in the cover letter had been enough for them. One, who opened by calling it "100% journal dependent", wrote the line as: "To do everything the reviewers requested, I had to extend the manuscript which is now X words beyond the limit." In the same thread, another said one journal had not minded a revision 500 words over while another would not allow even 50. If neither the letter nor the journal's pages settle it, ask the editorial office before you cut rather than guess. And where the journal has a written rule, as JCO and the JCI Research Letter do, a note in the cover letter does not change it.

The usual way to make room is to move material into supplementary files or an appendix. Some venues say plainly how far that goes:

• JCI caps research articles at 9 display items in the main text, and "There are no limits on the number of display items in the supplemental material."
• ACL Rolling Review warns that "reviewers are not required to consider material in appendices" and says that "Any material necessary to assess the novelty, claims and implications of the study (including related work, technical clarifications, discussion), should likewise be part of the main paper." Then it goes further: "Including key materials in appendices could be viewed as an attempt to circumvent the content page count, and result in desk rejection."
• ICLR 2026 allows as many appendix pages as you like, "but reviewers are not required to read the appendix."

Two of those three say reviewers do not have to read the appendix. That matters for material a reviewer asked for. If a reviewer asked for an analysis because they doubted a claim, moving it to the supplement and naming it only in the response letter leaves the claim looking unsupported to a reader of the main text. Keep the result and the sentence that interprets it in the main text, and move the method and extra tables to the supplement.

When you still have to cut, cut from the parts the reviewers did not ask about:

1. Leave the requested additions whole. Your response letter points to them, and that is where the reviewers and the editor will look to see their points answered.
2. Take words from elsewhere. The introduction's background, results restated in the discussion, and methods detail that can go to the supplement are the usual places.
3. Cut before you write line references. Circulation wants each response to give "the exact page number(s), paragraph(s), and line number(s) where each revision was made". Every cut moves the lines below it, so a response letter written first will point to the wrong places.
4. Expect the cuts to be read. Circulation says "Indicate clearly any deletions." and JCI wants "a marked-up version of the entire manuscript showing revisions". Do not quietly remove something a reviewer praised or asked about.

For what counts toward the limit in the first place, and what some journals charge for pages over it, see what counts toward a journal's word limit.

If you use an AI tool to do the cutting, read your publisher's AI policy first. Elsevier's journal policy says "Basic checks of grammar, spelling and punctuation do not need a declaration statement", but "when an AI tool makes substantive changes to sentence structure or organization of a part of the text, this should be disclosed." A pass that shortens your sentences can cross that line; if you are unsure, disclose it or ask the editor. Publisher AI disclosure policies, compared sets out where the other publishers draw the line.

When the reviewers' additions have to stay and the rest of the paper still has to shrink, HumanPen's condense option can take on the rest. Reduce the word count to a target while facts, numbers and citations stay, returned as the same editable file. Besides one target for the whole document, you can select paragraphs and give each its own word budget, so the sections a reviewer asked for can stay out of it. It handles English documents only. Check the returned file against your revision for every number and citation, and only then write the line references in your response letter.

Will a journal reject a revision that is over the word limit? Some say what they do. JCO requires revisions to meet the article type's limit, and JCI says Research Letters that break it "will be returned". Many others leave it to the editor, so check your decision letter and the journal's revision instructions. Where the page limit is hard, as at ICLR and in ACL Rolling Review, a paper over it is desk-rejected.

Do I have to ask for the extra page at ACL or EMNLP? The 2026 calls say final versions "will be given one additional page of content", so it is part of the rules for accepted papers rather than something you request.

Can I ask for more space? Physical Review Letters has a formal route: a waiver of half a page or more. Editors weigh whether there is "a clear need for the room", and their decision cannot be appealed. At journals without a written route, ask the editor before you cut, and give the reason: the reviewers' requests.

Does the reference list count toward the limit? It depends on the journal. JCI's limits include references; many journals leave them out. What counts toward a journal's word limit compares seven journals.

• JCO Journals (ASCO), Manuscript format, read 25 September 2026.
• The Journal of Clinical Investigation, Submission instructions: first submissions and revised manuscripts, read 25 September 2026.
• Circulation, Revised and accepted manuscripts and Article types, read 25 September 2026.
• Nature, Formatting guide, read 25 September 2026.
• Nature Communications, Submission guidelines: Article, read 25 September 2026.
• Physical Review Letters, Information for authors, read 25 September 2026.
• ACL 2026, Call for main conference papers, and EMNLP 2026, Call for main conference papers, read 25 September 2026.
• ACL Rolling Review, Call for papers, read 25 September 2026.
• ICML 2026, Call for papers, read 25 September 2026.
• ICLR 2026, Author guide, read 25 September 2026.
• Elsevier, Generative AI policies for journals, read 25 September 2026.
• r/PhD, Question about page limits after peer-review revisions, posted 6 September 2026, read 25 September 2026.