Fish Taxonomy Paper Rejected for Being 'Too Exciting'

A taxonomic revision paper by Dr. Nolan Lateral of the Smithsonian has been rejected by the Journal of Systematic Ichthyology not for methodological flaws but because the editorial board found the writing 'too engaging.' 'The data is rigorous,' wrote editor-in-chief Dr. Petra Caudal in her rejection letter. 'The methodology is sound. But the prose reads like someone actually wants to be understood, which is fundamentally at odds with the traditions of ichthyological taxonomy.' The paper, titled 'A Revision of the Genus Apogon with Notes on Phylogenetic Affinities,' contained sentences the editorial board flagged as 'dangerously readable,' including: 'The cardinalfish lineage tells a story of remarkable diversification' and 'These results suggest a more complex evolutionary history than previously appreciated.' 'A story?' Dr. Caudal wrote in the margins. 'This is taxonomy, not literature. Please replace with passive voice and remove all traces of narrative arc.' Dr. Lateral, who has published 47 papers in ichthyological journals, said the rejection left him 'genuinely confused.' 'I thought clarity was a virtue,' he said. 'I used active verbs. I structured the paragraphs logically. I even included a conclusion that summarized the main findings. Apparently, this was all wrong.' The journal suggested revisions including: replacing 'we discovered' with 'it was observed,' removing all adjectives, and restructuring the abstract to ensure 'no reader could possibly enjoy it.' Dr. Lateral has resubmitted the paper with the requested changes. The new version begins: 'Specimens were examined. Findings were found. Results ensued.' The journal has accepted it pending minor revisions to make the acknowledgments section 'less grateful.'