Julie-
But here's where I think that argument falls down. The wikipedia is fortunately unlike almost every print encyclopedia in that one can (or will be able to, one day, we hope) find information on virtually anything. I would guess that, when people see "online, open content encyclopedia", they think in terms of information available in print encyclopedia - I imagine it this way, laugh if you like: "Hey mom, I found this really cool site!" "Really? What kind of site? (<subtext of normal parental concern>)" "It's an encyclopedia - look at this cool picture of an aardvark!" "Gee, honey, that *is* pretty cool! Useful, too!" And mom, seeing it's an educational tool, goes back to doing whatever, only to have her kid come up later and ask about the information in the Felching article (and by the way, that looks a lot like a dictionary entry to me), which might not be at all intelligible to a pre-teen, at least.
Dr. Merkwuerdigliebe says: "Congratulations, Mom, your son is uninhibited enough to ask about sexual subjects. That means he will probably have less problems than his peers when dealing with contraception and STD prevention in later life." I suspect that the kind of moms who would freak out when their children ask them about sexual subjects have already indoctrinated them quite well not to do so.
Of course, maybe in the future Mom can enable a filter to keep her children from being exposed to specific aspects of reality. But I would support this only when it is generic enough to allow other Moms to choose other aspects of reality, instead of simply assuming that sex==bad is the only parenting standard that matters. That would surely not be NPOV.
Regards,
Erik