This HTML5 document contains 11 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

PrefixNamespace IRI
n10http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/ontology/
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
n7http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/wYCnKinDt0WYgusUcVWAjw==
n11http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/2Gx2Ax0yO5gdqGTvu4fvQQ==
n6http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/exypQ9Az8W6M_marrsPOrg==
n14http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/ZGo9RTLudD8NlejyF1zBKQ==
n12http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/gqojnAlxHi92Y2eYRFPlqw==
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
n5http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/cloverfield/property/
n2http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/N8e0t3dbGE40aXXjMuMhng==
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
n8http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/4aydFctH5etxSfyfrpbw9Q==
n13http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/xLQyd42fWHyH6PCrVFpR0w==
n4http://dbkwik.webdatacommons.org/resource/XIvEf6_4BKOKKVWXHvJlPw==
Subject Item
n2:
rdfs:label
Cloverpedia:User Manual
rdfs:comment
When you first see a wiki, it doesn't seem like it could possibly work. If anybody can come along and change things, then how can the information be trusted? Doesn't it just get vandalized, or fall into chaos? Once you start participating, you see that that "weakness" is actually a wiki's greatest strength. Sure, anybody can add anything -- and then everybody else gets to proofread it, and fix mistakes. Information that looks suspicious can be verified. Vandalism is almost always fixed within minutes. It's possible for someone to post errors, or nonsense -- but over time, the best wins out.
dcterms:subject
n4: n8: n12:
n5:wikiPageUsesTemplate
n6: n7: n11: n13: n14:
n10:abstract
When you first see a wiki, it doesn't seem like it could possibly work. If anybody can come along and change things, then how can the information be trusted? Doesn't it just get vandalized, or fall into chaos? Once you start participating, you see that that "weakness" is actually a wiki's greatest strength. Sure, anybody can add anything -- and then everybody else gets to proofread it, and fix mistakes. Information that looks suspicious can be verified. Vandalism is almost always fixed within minutes. It's possible for someone to post errors, or nonsense -- but over time, the best wins out. If you're reading these words, then you're an editor. If you see a problem on one of the pages, don't roll your eyes and complain about it. Just fix it!