Other / unclassifiable — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 8 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 79% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.
Observations
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Content that also appears on other registered channels
Posts published here appear in near-verbatim form on 1 other registered channel. This entry also forms a group of 2 channels linked by matching posts. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.
Matching posts — open both and compare (4 of the pairs behind the counts below)
Channels this entry shares post bodies with, where at least one matching post pair has no forward credit between the two channels, or to a common source, recorded in our data
Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.
What this cannot establish
MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.
Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. None of the 0 matches recorded here fall after that date, so for this entry we cannot say whether any of them carried a credit. The duplication is measured; the absence of attribution is not.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 42 comparable posts for this entry, running 6 August 2026 to 9 November 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.
The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.
Verbatim republication has three causes and the text separates only two: a clone/mirror, unattributed copy-paste, or BOTH channels copying a common third source that neither attributes. The spread filter (content held by at most 8 channels) reduces the third and does not remove it.
'Earliest' means earliest IN THIS CORPUS. A channel ingested one page deep will look younger than a neighbour ingested in full; corpus_coverage above is there to be checked before the direction is believed.
shared_verified_est extrapolates the sampled pass rate over the full narrow match count; sampled/passed are the numbers actually measured.
Absence of a forward header is not proof of intent: Telegram lets a channel disable forward attribution, and a credit written in the body is not parsed as attribution here (mention_edge_either_way above is the closest available signal).
Of the group of 2 channels, the one whose matching posts we hold earliest is @F8FFl — which is this entry. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.
Recorded under the key clone_source, last confirmed 11 November 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
Channels linked by matching posts
This channel is in a group of 2 registered channels linked by matching posts. Links are found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown in this list. “First” could only mean first in our own crawl, which depends on how deep we happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. Our one hand-check read 45 of the highest-confidence flagged pairs against the live Telegram pages. In 18 of them the live page showed a “Forwarded from” credit that our database had no record of, so reading that pair as an unattributed copy was wrong; the check did not measure who published first. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Near-verbatim matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.
63 measurements spanning 94 days, net +107,567. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 1,207,202–1,354,663 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 63
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
9 Nov 2026, 20:55
1,335,523
-450
8 Nov 2026, 10:37
1,335,973
-849
7 Nov 2026, 06:25
1,336,822
+45
6 Nov 2026, 06:07
1,336,777
+204
5 Nov 2026, 03:09
1,336,573
-1,075
4 Nov 2026, 00:55
1,337,648
+782
3 Nov 2026, 04:28
1,336,866
+1,068
2 Nov 2026, 01:51
1,335,798
-169
1 Nov 2026, 04:57
1,335,967
+11,417
31 Oct 2026, 06:11
1,324,550
+170
30 Oct 2026, 05:30
1,324,380
+2,127
29 Oct 2026, 05:51
1,322,253
+638
28 Oct 2026, 05:10
1,321,615
-626
27 Oct 2026, 04:39
1,322,241
+2,893
26 Oct 2026, 01:57
1,319,348
+736
25 Oct 2026, 00:27
1,318,612
+761
24 Oct 2026, 00:20
1,317,851
+609
23 Oct 2026, 03:04
1,317,242
+948
22 Oct 2026, 02:30
1,316,294
+1,035
20 Oct 2026, 21:30
1,315,259
first reading
Engagement
2,707 posts held, back to 17 May 2026 — the reader has reached the start of this channel’s public history, so this is the full archive Telegram still exposes. Read across 196 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
0.432%
avg views ÷ 1,335,523 subscribers
Avg views / post
5,760
767 posts measured
Reaction rate
0%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
767
of 2,707 held
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views — note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate. It is computed over the 2 of 767 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 10 November 2026
Posts held
2,707 (17 May 2026 – 10 November 2026)
Views total
4,420,544
Reactions total
0
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
11 Nov 2026, 06:51 UTC
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
What this channel posts
Photos
≈1,550
Videos
≈540
Links
≈58
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 11 November 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
View velocity
How fast this channel’s own posts pick up views, from re-reading them repeatedly in the hours and days after they were published rather than the single reading most entries on this register get. Coverage is early and only a small minority of channels hold it at all — a gap in this section means the post has not been re-read again yet, not that nothing happened.
Computed from 764 of this channel’s own posts over the last 30 days: across 10 of this channel’s own posts with a clear reading, a typical one reaches half of its last-observed view count within 3 days of being posted; a typical post has already reached 13.7% of its 24-hour view count within the first hour, and 49.4% within the first six; the median 24-hour reach across those posts is 23,000 views — 1.72% of this channel’s own subscriber count (90th percentile 26,120).
8 most recently posted, with a view-velocity reading
15 minutesprovisional — final view count still climbing
Curve is every standard checkpoint we hold a reading for (+1h, +3h, +6h, +12h, +24h, +48h, +7d after posting) — measured where a real reading landed close enough to that age, interpolated where it did not but readings on both sides let one be worked out between them. Nothing is ever extrapolated past the last real reading. Latest reading is the newest view and reaction count we hold for the post, side by side, so a gap between how views and reactions moved is visible without following it into the Observations section above. 24h reach is that one checkpoint on its own, labelled the same way. Half of last-observed views is the age at which a post’s view count crossed half of the highest figure we have read for it so far — an upper bound when the very first reading was already past half (we cannot see the actual crossing), and biased low while the post is still climbing, since “half of final” is dividing by a number that has not finished growing yet. Both caveats are printed inline wherever they apply, never silently dropped.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
11
across the posts below
Posts paid on
2
of 1,000 we hold a reading for · 0.2%
Most on one post
10
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @F8FFl. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 1,000 most recent posts we hold for this entry (the sample is capped at 1,000), published 3 October 2026 to 10 November 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 4 of 767 posts held from the last 30 days (0.522%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
Showing the 12 most recent of 2,707 posts we hold for @F8FFl. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Posts edited after publishing
@F8FFl edited 12 posts after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
First edit seen
16 August 2026
Most recent edit
31 October 2026
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
Named by 4 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
Dead references
5
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
5
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
0
vacant every time we have ever looked
@F8FFl named 5 handles that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all. A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
Evidenced gone
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant — a genuine, evidenced change, not an inference from absence.
@kahwksn named in 2 posts, 8 October 2026 – 13 October 2026 · confirmed gone 15 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@gcjfuhg named in 2 posts, 10 August 2026 – 14 August 2026 · confirmed gone 14 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@mn_m_n1 named in 1 post, 2 November 2026 – 2 November 2026 · confirmed gone 10 November 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@bdgdbfufbfhdj named in 1 post, 6 September 2026 – 6 September 2026 · confirmed gone 13 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@daltimao named in 1 post, 4 September 2026 – 4 September 2026 · confirmed gone 14 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
Channels Telegram recommends alongside this one
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 15 August 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
ستوريات انستا عبارات صور بنات💓🧿 @TNTNC · 38,872 Telegram ranks this channel #11 of 40 here — alongside 39 others — read 30 August 2026
صور منوعة♡متحركة Gif♡ @Gif2022am · 43,468 Telegram ranks this channel #11 of 52 here — alongside 51 others — read 27 August 2026
اقتباسات شريان ♥🌿 @W_06_W · 30,638 Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 53 here — alongside 52 others — read 5 September 2026
ستوريات حب️ انستا صور مقاطع @MQ_XO · 63,650 Telegram ranks this channel #20 of 44 here — alongside 43 others — read 21 August 2026
كروبات دردشه شباب بنات سوالف @Y_Y_Y_I · 56,884 Telegram ranks this channel #25 of 54 here — alongside 53 others — read 22 August 2026
ستوريات حـب وغـزل ☁️♥️ ؛ @lvv_me · 28,822 Telegram ranks this channel #28 of 46 here — alongside 45 others — read 8 September 2026
ستوريات انستا تيك توك الـ سيلا @TJ_H5 · 72,282 Telegram ranks this channel #28 of 59 here — alongside 58 others — read 19 August 2026
ستوريات انستا موسيقى صور رمزيات كروبات اغاني ردح اعراس اشعار اقتباسات @gog788 · 95,700 Telegram ranks this channel #29 of 56 here — alongside 55 others — read 18 August 2026
اقتباسات @mmmsc · 107,550 Telegram ranks this channel #31 of 46 here — alongside 45 others — read 18 August 2026
قناه. اشعار. شعر حزينه غزل حب @PP_83 · 76,253 Telegram ranks this channel #38 of 67 here — alongside 66 others — read 19 August 2026
كروبات❤️بنات❤️بغداد❤️تعرف❤️درشه @PP_82 · 90,312 Telegram ranks this channel #40 of 62 here — alongside 61 others — read 16 August 2026
خلفيات💜رمزيات💜اغاني💜صور💜بنات @VV_65 · 245,640 Telegram ranks this channel #42 of 56 here — alongside 55 others — read 17 August 2026
شعر ، غزل ، حب ، ابوذيات ، دارميات @G3333 · 88,508 Telegram ranks this channel #42 of 63 here — alongside 62 others — read 15 August 2026
كروبات💛تعارف💛دردشة💛بنات💛شباب @PP_71 · 97,403 Telegram ranks this channel #45 of 64 here — alongside 63 others — read 15 August 2026
بوت زخرفة زغرفة اسامي اسماء @sm_3l · 86,868 Telegram ranks this channel #48 of 69 here — alongside 68 others — read 17 August 2026
سمير صبيح @sameersabeh · 22,541 Telegram ranks this channel #49 of 63 here — alongside 62 others — read 24 September 2026
This channel appears in 17 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 16 where it ranks highest are shown above. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
Cite this entry
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 9 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“اقتباسات عبارات ستوريات انستا” (@F8FFl), 1,335,523 subscribers as measured 9 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/F8FFl.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.
