Well, maybe there is no clear "all text" statement that can be made here, as some of it must be distributed using the terms of the original contributor, of which version 1.2 may be the chosen version for display on wikipedia but version 1.1 should be available for people who choose to if the text derived from before June 2003.
It is available under 1.1, but Wikipedia has no obligation to say so.
I still do not see how it is up to wikipedia to be allowed to specify the base version which may be chosen by users when contributors in the past had a wider range of possible licenses to choose from for the same content. Content providers of free material should not reduce the rights of consumers, or attempt to hide the fact that they are reducing their rights IMO.
Wikipedia is not a content provider, it is a content user. The content is provided by the contributors, and they can release it under whatever licenses they please as long as one of them is the license required by Wikipedia (they can choose not to release it under that license, but then it cannot be posted to Wikipedia). Wikipedia has every right to specify what content can be used on Wikipedia - that is all it is doing.