Music — 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 why it has no browse page of its own yet.
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 word for word on 2 other registered channels. 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)
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. 2 of the 3 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 54 comparable posts for this entry, running 2 June 2019 to 7 August 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).
Across the whole group of 3, the earliest publisher we hold is @PPPPJ — 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 8 August 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.
Also posting the same content
This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 2 other registered channels, found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register. That matching has been checked by hand against the live Telegram pages and found reliable — 0 wrong of 45 pairs re-read.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown. The same hand-check found that reading wrong 18 of 45 times — 60%, no better than a coin flip — because it depends on how deep our own crawl happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Word-for-word 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.
8 measurements spanning 6 days, net -4,568. 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 2,361,743–2,367,681 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
12 Aug 2026, 05:45
2,362,428
-637
11 Aug 2026, 07:07
2,363,065
-855
10 Aug 2026, 06:31
2,363,920
-772
9 Aug 2026, 04:11
2,364,692
-209
8 Aug 2026, 04:21
2,364,901
-891
7 Aug 2026, 04:58
2,365,792
-1,204
6 Aug 2026, 11:00
2,366,996
no change
6 Aug 2026, 10:58
2,366,996
first reading
Engagement
8,188 posts held, back to 22 December 2018 — the reader has reached the start of this channel’s public history, so this is the full archive Telegram still exposes. Read across 3,806 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
0.26%
avg views ÷ 2,362,428 subscribers
Avg views / post
6,130
917 posts measured
Reaction rate
—
this channel exposes no reaction counts
Posts in window
917
of 8,188 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.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 12 August 2026
Posts held
8,188 (22 December 2018 – 12 August 2026)
Views total
5,623,455
Reactions total
—
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
12 Aug 2026, 23:40 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
≈7,230
Videos
≈4
Links
≈23
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 12 August 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 809 of this channel’s own posts over the last 30 days: across 5of this channel’s own posts with a clear reading, a typical one reaches half of its last-observed view count within 13 hours of being posted; a typical post has already reached 9.02% of its 24-hour view count within the first hour, and 39.8% within the first six; the median 24-hour reach across those posts is 27,200 views — 1.15% of this channel’s own subscriber count (90th percentile 28,520).
8 most recently posted, with a view-velocity reading
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 viewsis 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.
Showing the 12 most recent of 8,188 posts we hold for @PPPPJ. 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
@PPPPJ edited 1 post 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
8 August 2026
Most recent edit
8 August 2026
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 46,912 of 1,151,006entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
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 2 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
3
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
0
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
3
vacant every time we have ever looked
@PPPPJ named 3 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.
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
@xqhqx named in 3 posts, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@avav162171 named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@i9m9i named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 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.
اقتباسات عبارات ستوريات 0:0 @PPPJP · 3,255,955 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 52 here — alongside 51 others — read 8 August 2026
حُـب . @op_35 · 308,213 Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 77 here — alongside 76 others — read 10 August 2026
اقتباسات ستوريات مَشـَاعر • @YYYYD · 1,713,531 Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 57 here — alongside 56 others — read 8 August 2026
اغاني صور افتارات بنات . @NNNZN · 1,185,827 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 49 here — alongside 48 others — read 8 August 2026
- أبيات عبارات فصحىَ @nnKnn · 1,337,995 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 57 here — alongside 56 others — read 8 August 2026
- كتابات دوستويفسكي ، اقتباسات حب ، خواطر . @zrzzzz · 1,363,781 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 56 here — alongside 55 others — read 8 August 2026
اقتباسات حب ، عبارات حزينه ، ستوريات 🖤 . @zzzzzz · 1,630,382 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 52 here — alongside 51 others — read 8 August 2026
اشعار اغاني صور بنات خلفيات @en_wk · 1,024,669 Telegram ranks this channel #4 of 62 here — alongside 61 others — read 8 August 2026
ابن بغداد @FN_73 · 161,119 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 69 here — alongside 68 others — read 12 August 2026
< Storm - ستورم @HRRRRis · 161,057 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 61 here — alongside 60 others — read 12 August 2026
اخبار وزارة التربية | ابن بابل @iraedo · 226,148 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 80 here — alongside 79 others — read 11 August 2026
المُصْحَف @lAlMosahfl · 770,523 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 74 here — alongside 73 others — read 8 August 2026
خلفيات اشعار صور بنات رمزيات @zzuzz · 873,089 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 52 here — alongside 51 others — read 8 August 2026
ᓭི༏ᓯྀ عبارات اقتباسات ستوريات @NlNNN · 2,072,251 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 56 here — alongside 55 others — read 8 August 2026
القمة وظائف فرص عمل مندوبين @KK_211 · 157,252 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 68 here — alongside 67 others — read 12 August 2026
ابراج اليوم , ابراج الفلك , توقعات الابراج @zz_zwz · 394,808 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 74 here — alongside 73 others — read 10 August 2026
بًّوِتُ تٌٍحٍمُيَلٌ تٍنَزُيٌل مَِن يۅټيۅݕ @zz_s5 · 255,896 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 49 here — alongside 48 others — read 10 August 2026
علي القريشي • مراجعة الحسم @O6_40 · 333,410 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 78 here — alongside 77 others — read 10 August 2026
𝗡𝘂𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗶𝘆 Ϯ🦇. @bbgbb · 187,609 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 61 here — alongside 60 others — read 11 August 2026
قرآن ادعيه دينيه دعاء ،🕌 @zzzxx8 · 344,670 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 84 here — alongside 83 others — read 10 August 2026
استوريات اكروبات صور بنات حب @zz7zz · 495,882 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 53 here — alongside 52 others — read 11 August 2026
- مَشاعِر . @XXX8Z · 262,198 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 78 here — alongside 77 others — read 10 August 2026
ادعيه ، اذكار ، خواطر ، القرآن . @zn_d6 · 287,371 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 66 here — alongside 65 others — read 10 August 2026
اقتباسات ، عبارات ، كلام حب، خواطر @PVVVV · 811,342 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 66 here — alongside 65 others — read 8 August 2026
This channel appears in 98 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 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 12 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“افتارات اغاني كروبات عاشكها” (@PPPPJ), 2,362,428 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/PPPPJ.
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.
