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.