The frog Paedophryne amauensis on a US dime. The image was featured on the Main Page of at least the Thai, Bulgarian, English, German, French, Chinese, Norwegian, Finnish and Russian Wikipedias in January (see gallery) and served as Open Access File of the Day on January 12, the day after the open-access article with the taxonomic description of the species had been published. The associated wiki articles about the species have been featured - or are scheduled to be so - on several other wikis, including the Spanish, West Flemish, Portuguese, Simple and Polish Wikipedias. It now exists in over 20 languages (see cross-wiki access stats). While being featured, it also drove considerable traffic to articles about the journal in which the original image was published (PLoS ONE) as well as its publisher (PLoS).
Provisional banner for Topic Pages at PLoS Computational Biology
In September, the open-access journal PLoS Computational Biology expressed an interest in publishing review articles suitable for being posted to the English Wikipedia as a seed for an evolving overview article on the subject (Signpost coverage). This kind of reuse of Open Access materials on Wikimedia projects - made possible by the journal using a Creative Commons Attribution license - goes beyond some existing partnerships with scientific journals, e.g. that with RNA Biology, which requires authors of manuscripts on new RNA families to accompany their submissions with the draft for a Wikipedia article (Wikinews coverage). By now, PLoS Computational Biology has established a dedicated manuscript track - Topic Pages - and the first manuscript has passed peer review and entered production. The initiative was well received at the Academic Publishing in Europe conference, one of the key conferences on scholarly publishing worldwide, where the Wikimedian in Residence on Open Science gave a plenary talk.
Materials from Open Access sources or otherwise related to Open Access have been featured on several Wikipedias this month. The following examples have been gathered manually, but it would be nice to have some automated support for that. Technical aspects of the documentation of such feature events are also the subject of a dedicated section in the tool testing report.