It's interesting that they're being criticized. One of the three responses on the page (the other two being positive) is: "This is an overtly political decision. Poor form."
Fact is that I doubt Wikipedia would have been possible in an environment where censorship and action without due process is seen as acceptable. Actually, access to wikipedia has been limited in the past by regimes that we consider totalitarian, or near-totalitarian, and the very action of censoring the web has been pointed out as a concrete manifestation of lack of democracy.
Democracy in the west has been weakened gradually over the past years. To a large degree because the population is helpless when it comes to influencing policy; we don't know how to act.
So when a clear opportunity to be heard presents itself I find it disgraceful that thoughtless and unprincipled people promote apathy and inaction. They should be deeply ashamed of themselves.
It's the same reason why I think Google and other big tech platforms shouldn't use their service to promote anti-SOPA initiatives... once you go down that track, your service is seen as divisive and political.
I hope the wikipedians in question will take some time to think about how their passive stance actually ends up jeopardizing their neutrality, and that once they have gotten their shit together, feel enough shame to apologize for being part of the problem.
I'm disgusted.
They've certainly got means, motivation and opportunity.