نزولآ عند رغبة الاخوة الكرام سيتم اصدار تطبيق chat gpt لجميع المعالجات وجميع الاصدارات القديمة والحديثة وحتى التابلت
❤236🔥34❤🔥25👎18💯14

Channel
@TAWFIQ1_TG
On this record: Topic · Observations · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Posts edited after publishing · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry
10,847subscribers
+632 since we began measuring on 8 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1004427512319 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @TAWFIQ1_TG |
| Created | Between 1 June 2026 and 3 July 2026— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 8 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 18 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 11 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 18 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/TAWFIQ1_TG |
Technology — 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 10 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 90% 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.
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.
7,780 average views per post against 10,809 subscribers — an engagement rate of 72.0%. Across the 4,902 registered channels in the same cohort — 10,000–31,616 subscribers, posting mainly in Arabic — the middle half sit between 2.82% and 14.5%, with a median of 7.18%.
| Window | 30 days (19 July 2026 – 18 August 2026) |
|---|---|
| Posts measured | 34 of 34 published in the window (0 exact, 34 rounded by Telegram) |
| Views totalled | 264,670 |
| Mature posts only | 78.7% over 30 posts read at least 24h after publication |
| Subscribers | 10,809 measured 17 August 2026 |
| Cohort | b10000:ara · 4,902 channels · p10 0.981% · p25 2.82% · p50 7.18% · p75 14.5% · p90 25.0% |
| Position in cohort | 99.204th percentile · 10.0× the cohort median |
| Uncertainty | ±0.031% of the figure, from Telegram’s rounding |
| Post language | Arabic · 100.0%of the window’s posts |
When this is recorded. A channel is listed here only when its engagement rate sits at or above the 99th percentile of its cohort and is at least 3× away from that cohort’s median — above it — on both the all-readings figure and the mature-only figure. The percentile alone would be circular: a percentile cut puts the same share of every cohort in the tail whatever the data looks like. The distance from the median is what makes it a statement about this channel.
This is not a verdict, and the direction is not a quality signal.A low rate has many innocent causes — audiences that read in the Telegram app without opening the channel, a subscriber base built long before the current output, an audience in a different timezone from our reading. A high rate has innocent causes too: a post that travelled far beyond the channel’s own subscribers will do it. We publish the measurement and the distribution it sits in. The full cohort baselines are downloadable, so this comparison can be reproduced rather than trusted.
Recorded under the key err_high, last confirmed 18 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.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 18 Aug 2026, 16:09 | 10,847 | +38 |
| 17 Aug 2026, 18:43 | 10,809 | +46 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 16:16 | 10,763 | +110 |
| 15 Aug 2026, 02:53 | 10,653 | +85 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 17:59 | 10,568 | -28 |
| 12 Aug 2026, 18:03 | 10,596 | +46 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 17:22 | 10,550 | +57 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 18:05 | 10,493 | +92 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 19:51 | 10,401 | +92 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 16:38 | 10,309 | +94 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 01:02 | 10,215 | first reading |
44 posts held, back to 3 July 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 19 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 16 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 44 (3 July 2026 – 16 August 2026) |
| Views total | 265,910 |
| Reactions total | 5,050 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 18 Aug 2026, 12:06 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.
Measured directly from 4 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
5,859 reactions across 43 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 65.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 3,807 | 65.0% | |
| 🔥 | 831 | 14.2% | |
| 👍 | 439 | 7.49% | |
| ❤🔥 | 395 | 6.74% | |
| 👎 | 196 | 3.35% | |
| 💯 | 191 | 3.26% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 43 of the 44 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 5,859reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 44 most recent posts we hold, published 3 July 2026 to 16 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
نزولآ عند رغبة الاخوة الكرام سيتم اصدار تطبيق chat gpt لجميع المعالجات وجميع الاصدارات القديمة والحديثة وحتى التابلت
❤236🔥34❤🔥25👎18💯14
تصلنا العديد من الطلبات من الإخوة لتعديل تطبيقات يمنية أو مصرية أو سورية أو تطبيقات عربية بصفة عامة وهنا نود التوضيح أن فريقنا يرفض رفضا قاطعا إجراء أي تعديلات على التطبيقات العربية ورغم أن جميع التطبيقات التي أخضعناها للاختبار كانت تعاني من ضعف شديد في بنيتها الأمنية بما فيها تلك المرتبطة بخدمات سحابية والتي نجحنا في تعديلها والاتصال بخدماتها بنجاح تام إلا أن عملنا هذا اقتصر على الفحص والاختبار الأمني البحت كما تمك…
❤148👍20💯11🔥9👎6
طلب واحد وانشاء 10 صور دفعة واحدة
❤78❤🔥12🔥10💯7👎6
هذا المعرض
❤53👎6💯6🔥6❤🔥1
امكانية طلب تصميم 30 صورة في الطلب الواحد ويرسلهم لكم ملف مضغوط او ملف pdf ينفع للمعلمين وللطلبة هذي تجربة تم طلب شهائد تكريم للطلاب وتم ارفاق اسماء الطلاب ونتائج والبيانات وترتيب معا شعار المدرسة وتم عمل كل الشهائد في ملف مضغوط بصيغة png او ملف pdf مثل ما تشاهدو حملو اللي تريدو ما عاد تحتاج تصمم على صورة صورة
❤84❤🔥11💯9👎5🔥3
Photo, posted without a caption
❤🔥47❤9👎6💯3🔥3
النسخة الاولة انا وقفتها اعتذر منكم عشان التحديث الجديد طبعآ خلال 3 ايام فقط بنزل الاصدار الجديد اخر اصدار
❤82🔥24👍14👎9💯3
المهام
🔥45❤21👍5👎2
جربو رفع الملفات ورفع الصور في النسخة اللي لديكم الرسمية شوفو كم بتسوي عشان نعرف الفارق لان النسخة هذي فارقة بشكل كبير لا قيود ولاتوقف للرفع او التحميل المميزات الجديدة يسوي صور ويرفع ملفات حتى لو ظهر يرجى الترقية او نفدت حصتك او الرجوع غدآ كل هذا الكلام كان سابقآ يتوقف الان بدون توقف حتى لو ظهرت والحمدلله لقد ازلتها ولن تظهر ولاكن اذا ظهرت مجددآ بيتم عمل صور ورفع ملفات او صور بدون توقف بيتم نشرها قريب خلصتها الحمد…
❤84🔥20👍8❤🔥6👎6
جربو رفع الملفات ورفع الصور في النسخة اللي لديكم الرسمية لان النسخة هذي فارقة بشكل كبير لا قيود ولاتوقف للرفع او التحميل بيتم نشرها قريب خلصتها الحمدلله
❤31🔥5
لم ننسى تفعيل التفكير العميق
❤63🔥27❤🔥8👍7💯2
نركز في رسالة السرفر بعد كل عملية رفع وهية الترقية ونشوف كيف بيتم تخطي رسالة السرفر ورسالة الرجوع غدآ رفع صور حتى 70 صور او ملف ولعوها ناااااااار ❤️🔥❤️🔥❤️🔥❤️🔥❤️🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
❤103🔥24👍9❤🔥6💯6
Showing the 12 most recent of 44 posts we hold for @TAWFIQ1_TG. 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.
@TAWFIQ1_TG edited 2 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.
Citation-graph rank — 873,801 of 1,549,376entries 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.
Named by 1 registered channel — 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.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
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.
@TAWFIQ1_TG named 10 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.
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
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 18 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“تطبيقات ذكاء اصطناعي” (@TAWFIQ1_TG), 10,847 subscribers as measured 18 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/TAWFIQ1_TG.
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.