:If there was notable public criticism of Wikipedia on these grounds (however specious we may think they are), then "Wikipedia is naughty because it contains sexually explicit content" would be a reasonable section to add to this article.  For example, if Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson, or a notable politician, etc. were to complain.  Certainly, Wikipedia contains articles on topics (obscure sexual practices, pornography) that Encyclopaedia Brittanica won't touch.  (Britannica, at least the concise online version, lacks an article on the esteemed Ron Jeremy, for instance).  However, until Wikipedia is subject to notable public criticism which we can verifiably document with reliable sources, adding such criticism to the list isn't appropriate.  If and when they do, I'll be happy to add it (even though I think such criticism is foolish demogoguery).