After reading the title, I was thinking "Agreed, adding type to your code definitely make it more readable".
For me, typed code is more readable than untyped code. As someone who writes & is very used to typed code.
Thinking back to a previous iteration of myself, learning C/C++, Javascript & (old, hint-less) PHP in my early 20s, typed code looked alien. Sure, if I'd applied myself a little to the reading, I guess I could've figured it out pretty easily, but I wasn't inclined to because it appeared impenetrable to me. In a similar way to regex or terse perl (though not as bad obviously).
TL;DR: It needs the advocacy because the readability gains aren't obvious/implicit.
The question is: if there were a weakly typed haskell (same/similar syntax & conventions, no strong typings), which one would a person familiar with haskell find easier to read?
Effective readability has two components: familiarity, & actual readability. We'll automatically find everything unfamiliar to be less readable, but once we're familiar with all options, which is most readable then?
I upgraded my keyboard from Cherry Red to Blue, so my Haskell is now strongly typed.
Self-awareness on familiarity is important for any developer to have before declaring code as readable or unreadable :)