Gosh. I'm sorry I wasn't more clear. You know there is objectionable material on Wikipedia because, of course, you have read the content disclaimer linked from every page.
Nope I've never read it and I'm fairly regular user. There is a whole market based around the fact that people don't read disclaimers (psychic readings are for entertainment perposes only etc). However haveing read it it appears that the general disclaimer does not cover objectionable material for that I have to follow a further link. So if a read a disclaimer (which quite clearly not everyone does) then follow another link to yet another dissclaimer I then get a warning. Presumerbly good enough for legal cover but I prefer to deal with what really happens.
Being adverse to seeing nasty stuff, you click the button on your browser that turns images on or off whenever you think you're likely to meet something you won't like (the only internal links to [[Autofellatio]], for instance, are pretty clearly labeled as to its sexual nature).
The problem with this is that it would rather lower my effectiveness on RC patrol that is also 4 clicks.
There is also the issue of external links. While I haven't looked into the issue with regards to Autofellatio I know that one of the reasons the goatse article is so popular is that it does not contain the image. There are plenty of places where I can find out what Autofellatio is with acompyaning pictures (and proabably full colour vidios if I should want them) where can I find articles on Autofellatio without images?