I'm ignorant of these matters, but it looks like Germany has laws against denying the Holocaust or approving Nazi actions in a way that "disturbs the peace", but not "anti-Semitism" broadly drawn.  I don't know whether German prosecutors are this unreasonable, but I know in the U.S. they have actually prosecuted children for making "child pornography" of themselves ... if the comment actually is illegal to make there, I'm not sure it is safe even for a victim to keep reposting it.  But Wikipedia itself should not be eager to gather up censorship laws from around the world.
It's too hard for me to puzzle through all the German text relevant to this case (which Google Translate handles far more poorly than Chinese or Arabic, alas).  But I think as we're seeing in the present Fae ArbCom case, there's a huge divide in perceptions of bias between those who are members of an ethnic group, and those who are outside of it.  Is it anti-gay to say that marriage should be between one man and one woman, or anti-Semitic to say that the U.S. should end all foreign aid to Israel?  Or to keep a street named after a historical figure with a notable animosity to either group?  Your answer depends on who you are.  If we are to continue to have one Wikipedia for every nation and background, we'll have to be willing to accommodate that terms like "homophobic" and "anti-Semitic" mean very different things to very different people, and not punish anyone for using them the way they personally perceive them.