Editing Word Count | The Fix for Both Underwriters and Overwriters

“Underwriters” and “overwriters” are often treated like fixed personality types—too short versus too long. But word count problems don’t come from one place. A more reliable way to edit is to diagnose where the imbalance lives in the story’s structure, then adjust at that level instead of blindly adding or cutting until the total page count matches a target.

In the writing community, underwriters are typically described as drafting first versions that run short, while overwriters draft long. ShaelinWrites says that label can be useful for self-awareness, yet it’s also oversimplified enough to cause collateral damage: writers may ignore other craft issues because they assume their “type” explains the word count. The core fix is to treat word count as a multi-layer problem. A book has multiple “planes,” and each plane has its own question about whether the draft has too little or too much material.

At the plot level, the question is whether the story has the right number of scenes. Too few scenes can leave the plot underdeveloped—setup, character movement, and conclusions may not land with enough clarity. Too many scenes can create extraneous material: repetitive scenes, scenes that cover the same ground, or segments that don’t serve the plot’s purpose.

At the scene level, the focus shifts to beats—small units of advancement within a scene. Too few beats makes a scene feel thin: descriptive beats, narrative beats, or dialogue progression may arrive too quickly, leaving the scene’s purpose unsupported. Too many beats can oversaturate the scene, causing it to meander and delay the moment the scene is meant to reach.

Next comes the beat level, where the question becomes sentence-level pacing inside each beat: are the beats fleshed out enough, or are they padded? Beats that are too brief can fail to deliver the intended description or action; beats that run too long can drag with unnecessary detail.

Finally, at the sentence level, the question is whether sentences have the right number of words. ShaelinWrites argues that sentence-level underwriting is rare; most drafts tend to be overwrought here, with wordiness, weasel words, weak adjectives, and other filler. Editing should therefore streamline sentences by removing what doesn’t change meaning.

Her own example illustrates the model’s complexity. She identifies as an underwriter overall, but not uniformly: her plot drafts often miss scenes, yet certain sections can be overwritten with too many scenes for what could be done in one. She also reports missing beats—especially in dialogue—while still sometimes over-describing in early drafts. When it comes to sentence-level revision, she leans toward cutting and streamlining.

The recommended workflow follows the same logic: start broad and work inward. If a book needs to be cut, delete unnecessary scenes first, then remove excess beats, then trim sentences, and only then cut individual words. The reverse applies when a book needs to grow. This approach prevents the common trap of using word count as a blunt instrument—like keeping an unnecessary scene just to add length, or cutting aggressively while accidentally worsening character development, world-building, or pacing. The takeaway is that “underwriter vs. overwriter” can guide instincts, but structural diagnosis determines what to change and where.