I thought this was a new discussion, see here, it turned out not to be but dates back to 2009.

OpenDNS, a website filtering service who offer paid services to corporations and educational institutions have been infiltrated by Porn Obsessed Wikipedians ... and, obviously drinking Jimbo Juice, are drunk on denial ... "absolutely none of the Wikipedia contains pornography"!!!

Following up on correspondence, it appears that the Wikimedia Foundation are sending out misleading responses to concerned individuals or institutions who ... if they are anything like OpenDNS ... are eating them as truths. See below ...

I pointed out that the Wikipedia folks have never said that "anything questionable will systematically be removed" ... they have defended it. What the WMF are saying is that any "illegal" images will be removed ... if and when a volunteer reports them. Not quite the same.
QUOTE(Marc Mirenzi OpenDNS Support Lead @ Wed 21th May 2010, 3:27pm) *
On 21 May 2010, at 09:03, OpenDNS wrote:

Hello -

We were informed today by the Wikipedia folks, that all Wikimedia images that contain anything questionable will systematically be removed from Wikipedia. The tags will still remain intact, but Wikipedia is aware of the problem and taking steps to counteract it.

Marc Mirenzi
OpenDNS Support Lead
QUOTE(Marc Mirenzi OpenDNS Support Lead @ Wed 21th May 2010, 3:27pm) *
Hello -

Half of the links you sent weren't even Wikipedia pages, the other half were either already taken down (as they violated wikipedias policies) or are illustrating part of a definition - even though they may contain graphic imagery, absolutely none of those links contained pornography.

Furthermore, you have the option to block wikipedia by domain name if you don't want users on your network accessing the site.

The site tags will remain intact as they are.

Marc Mirenzi
OpenDNS Support Lead

Previous discussion ...
QUOTE(tarantino @ Wed 25th November 2009, 3:27pm) *
Funny, I was recently reviewing opendns.com, a web filtering company that encourages its customers to tag domains with various labels. The crowdsourcers there have decided en.wikipedia.org doesn't contain pornography. They are still undecided if it contains adult themes, sexuality or nudity. They're also undecided about everything on Commons.
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Thu 26th November 2009, 9:17am) *
Well, then, take those pedophilia links I've been compiling and send
them to whoever runs OpenDNS. See what shakes out.

And don't forget Cyde's collection:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cyde/Weird_pictures
And who can forget BADIMAGES:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=242094900

I went on to ask them why such images as these are "not pornographic" ... for example, "Pissing in a glass" is not even used on the project.

Please tell me what is not pornographic about these images or links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cyde/Weird_pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Erot...graphy_websites
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pissing_in_a_glass.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wiki-sball.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Staff_Of...Horn_Of_Man.JPG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Natural_...ture_(nude).jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Melissa_Wolf_10a.JPG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Justine.jpg