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 71% 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 5 other registered channels. This entry also sits inside a group of 6 channels linked by matching posts, directly or through other channels in the group; two members of the group may share no posts with each other. 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 (6 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. 178 of the 178 matches recorded here fall after that date and carried no header when we read them. The rest predate reliable capture and are not evidence either way.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 283 comparable posts for this entry, running 15 October 2022 to 11 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 6 channels, the one whose matching posts we hold earliest is @nnKnn. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.
Recorded under the keys clone_copy · clone_mutual · clone_source, last confirmed 12 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 6 registered channels linked by matching posts, directly or through other channels in the group. This channel may share no posts with some of the channels listed below, and listed channels may share none with each other. 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.
65 measurements spanning 98 days, net +78,800. 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 2,054,671–2,159,339 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 65
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
12 Nov 2026, 16:20
2,147,262
+3,080
10 Nov 2026, 15:56
2,144,182
+1,425
9 Nov 2026, 02:47
2,142,757
-311
7 Nov 2026, 20:07
2,143,068
+1,129
6 Nov 2026, 18:18
2,141,939
-1,222
5 Nov 2026, 17:20
2,143,161
+146
4 Nov 2026, 17:56
2,143,015
+2,831
3 Nov 2026, 15:35
2,140,184
+560
2 Nov 2026, 17:09
2,139,624
+784
1 Nov 2026, 15:27
2,138,840
+3,281
31 Oct 2026, 15:15
2,135,559
+2,413
30 Oct 2026, 12:58
2,133,146
+4,168
29 Oct 2026, 12:30
2,128,978
+3,724
28 Oct 2026, 09:06
2,125,254
+4,879
27 Oct 2026, 09:49
2,120,375
+8,491
26 Oct 2026, 09:17
2,111,884
+7,603
25 Oct 2026, 09:50
2,104,281
+4,738
24 Oct 2026, 07:46
2,099,543
+8,911
23 Oct 2026, 06:35
2,090,632
+2,845
22 Oct 2026, 08:08
2,087,787
first reading
Engagement
11,199 posts held, back to 14 November 2019 — the reader has reached the start of this channel’s public history, so this is the full archive Telegram still exposes. Read across 2,849 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
0.208%
avg views ÷ 2,147,262 subscribers
Avg views / post
4,470
2,450 posts measured
Reaction rate
0%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
2,450
of 11,199 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 5 of 2,450 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 12 November 2026
Posts held
11,199 (14 November 2019 – 12 November 2026)
Views total
10,947,877
Reactions total
0
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
12 Nov 2026, 23:15 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.
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 2,444 of this channel’s own posts over the last 30 days: across 40 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 14.0% of its 24-hour view count within the first hour, and 49.0% within the first six; the median 24-hour reach across those posts is 27,350 views — 1.27% of this channel’s own subscriber count (90th percentile 36,680).
8 most recently posted, with a view-velocity reading
28 minutesupper bound — already past half at first reading · provisional — 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
1
across the posts below
Posts paid on
1
of 1,000 we hold a reading for · 0.1%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @NlNNN. 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 1 November 2026 to 12 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: 0 of 2,450 posts held from the last 30 days (0%) 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 11,199 posts we hold for @NlNNN. 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.
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 6 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
18
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
17
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
1
vacant every time we have ever looked
@NlNNN named 18 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.
@iieee7 named in 8 posts, 8 August 2026 – 9 August 2026 · confirmed gone 14 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@zinkdjpwd named in 4 posts, 2 September 2026 – 3 September 2026 · confirmed gone 2 November 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@rafidain_964 named in 3 posts, 14 October 2026 – 20 October 2026 · confirmed gone 28 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@dfgeracr named in 2 posts, 4 October 2026 – 3 November 2026 · confirmed gone 11 November 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@qqm23m named in 2 posts, 11 October 2026 – 11 October 2026 · confirmed gone 11 November 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@n_rrb named in 2 posts, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026 · confirmed gone 15 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@jo_5jk named in 1 post, 7 October 2026 – 7 October 2026 · confirmed gone 13 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@zbzxx1 named in 1 post, 5 October 2026 – 5 October 2026 · confirmed gone 26 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@farhat5231 named in 1 post, 1 October 2026 – 1 October 2026 · confirmed gone 8 November 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@v_c_7_v named in 1 post, 10 September 2026 – 10 September 2026 · confirmed gone 2 November 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@alirab2 named in 1 post, 2 September 2026 – 2 September 2026 · confirmed gone 14 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@daltimao named in 1 post, 2 September 2026 – 2 September 2026 · confirmed gone 14 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@ferhataslan2 named in 1 post, 29 August 2026 – 29 August 2026 · confirmed gone 3 November 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@sultan67r named in 1 post, 20 August 2026 – 20 August 2026 · confirmed gone 31 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@epxbdf0i0oo5yzky named in 1 post, 15 August 2026 – 15 August 2026 · confirmed gone 4 November 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@zaza66n named in 1 post, 12 August 2026 – 12 August 2026 · confirmed gone 2 November 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@mx_x3330 named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026 · confirmed gone 12 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
@exvxr named in 1 post, 11 August 2026 – 11 August 2026
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 8 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.
كلام لحبيبي +معايدات+اقتباسات حب عزل @Xg_bx · 81,920 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 53 here — alongside 52 others — read 18 August 2026
ސاމ ᯓ @NINNNlll · 43,118 Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 54 here — alongside 53 others — read 27 August 2026
صور ملصقات متحركات - ᓭི༏ᓯྀ @nKnnn · 2,171,233 Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 49 here — alongside 48 others — read 23 August 2026
اغاني صور افتارات بنات . @NNNZN · 1,326,132 Telegram ranks this channel #4 of 49 here — alongside 48 others — read 8 August 2026
- أبيات عبارات فصحىَ @nnKnn · 1,181,954 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 57 here — alongside 56 others — read 8 August 2026
أيقونة الحشد الشعبي و المقاومة @ayqunat_alhashd · 20,026 Telegram ranks this channel #16 of 49 here — alongside 48 others — read 25 September 2026
P_E_6 @P_E_68 · 10 Telegram ranks this channel #16 of 35 here — alongside 34 others — read 23 September 2026
اخبار العراق - Iraq News @Iraq_now3 · 505,990 Telegram ranks this channel #17 of 62 here — alongside 61 others — read 9 August 2026
اقتباسات اغاني حب عبارات كروبات دردشة @EN_QE · 813,507 Telegram ranks this channel #18 of 63 here — alongside 62 others — read 8 August 2026
سورس تصاميم العمدة ستور العمدة @wuuwuu · 53,054 Telegram ranks this channel #25 of 53 here — alongside 52 others — read 23 August 2026
صورة وسطر ᥫ᭡. @qggxg · 34,365 Telegram ranks this channel #32 of 63 here — alongside 62 others — read 1 September 2026
قناة اشعار حب وغزل ❤✨ @SV_OqO · 24,339 Telegram ranks this channel #34 of 51 here — alongside 50 others — read 15 September 2026
📉 وحوش التداول Forex📈 @Y_s_sb · 22,642 Telegram ranks this channel #41 of 51 here — alongside 50 others — read 17 September 2026
< L A R F E N - لارفين ® @cccpck · 101,316 Telegram ranks this channel #41 of 62 here — alongside 61 others — read 15 August 2026
شبكة أبن الغربية ألتعليمية @ET_ETu · 214,282 Telegram ranks this channel #54 of 70 here — alongside 69 others — read 11 August 2026
This channel appears in 15 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. 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 12 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“عبارات اقتباسات ستوريات ᓭི༏ᓯྀ” (@NlNNN), 2,147,262 subscribers as measured 12 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/NlNNN.
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.
