Channel
@alshafeia_police
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
998subscribers
+23 since we began measuring on 8 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001809344742 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @alshafeia_police |
| Created | Between 1 October 2022 and 30 September 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 8 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 16 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 3 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 16 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/alshafeia_police |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 16 Aug 2026, 17:28 | 998 | +13 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 10:01 | 985 | +10 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 14:46 | 975 | first reading |
18 posts held, back to 20 September 2025 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof 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 7 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 18 (20 September 2025 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 446 |
| Reactions total | — |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 8 Aug 2026, 14:46 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.
23 reactions across 7 posts, in 2 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 91.3% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 21 | 91.3% | |
| 🤔 | 2 | 8.70% |
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 8 of the 18 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 23reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 18 most recent posts we hold, published 20 September 2025 to 7 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.
فتشت في نسخ المغني وفي شرح الخطيب على التنبيه فوجدتها (لا على ندور) وليس كما نقل الشرواني وتبعه محقق التحفة والنهاية ط دار الضياء ولم يذكرها صاحب المنهل النضاخ رأسا المسألة في كتاب النكاح فصل فيما يمنع النكاح من الرق
وفي قول أنكره بعضهم يكفي .. كذا في مغني المحتاج ط الميمنية ونهاية المحتاج ط الضياء وقد تصحّف في طبعة الحلبي والفيحاء إلى: وأنكره بعضهم. ويكفي .. فانظر كيف جُعل القول الضعيف معتمدا! وخالف متن المنهاج القائل لا بُدّ من صحة النكاح !
👍3
تهذيب الأسماء واللغات! المفصل فخر الدين قباوة
👍1
في الإسناد لا في المفردات خلت طبعتا هذا الشرح الأولى والثانية من حرف النفي!
👍1
من مقدمة مرشد الأنام في ترجمة الإمام أبي ثور لا أدري إن كان هذا الخطأ في المخطوط أيضا.
منهاج الطالبين تحقيق الحداد ط البشائر ج٢ ١- شرط الرد بعيب كشرط القبض، كلاهما من مقتضيات العقد، فتعليلهما واحد. والشرط الثاني مما لا غرض فيه كشرط أن لا يأكل إلا كذا. فماذا فعل الشيخ؟ جعل المسائل ثلاثة وظن أن المثال الثاني مسألة ثانية! فانتبه رعاك الله ٢- لإثابته كما في التحفة، وليس لإثباته.
تحفة المحتاج جزء ٤ / ط الضياء خطآن في مسألة واحدة حق هذا الكتاب على من حققه أن يعيد قراءته بتأن ليظهر له مثل هذه الأخطاء، وهي ليست بالقليلة.
الدم في ترك المأمور مرتب مقدر كدم التمتع، وهو المختار خلافا للمنهاج الذي مشى على أنه مرتب معدل، فكيف حكم الغمراوي على كلام المنهاج بأنه مرتب مقدر؟ والله أعلم
طبعة الفيحاء ما علاقة تحقيق مغني المحتاج بنظم واجبات الحج عند الحنفية؟
👍7🤔2
تحقيق المحرر للإمام الرافعي مسألة الدين على الغير ليست داخلة في الصور السابقة حتى تعطف على ما قبلها، بل هي مسألة منفصلة ! والله أعلم
👍1
الطبعة الأولى بتحقيق الحداد (١٤٢١) سالمة من خطأ وقعت فيه الطبعة الخامسة (١٤٤٣) ج٢ منهاج الطالبين الخطأ في حذف الواو من التعليق التاسع
منهاج الطالبين تحقيق الحداد ط البشائر ج٢ مكتوب في الحديث فباع إحداهما بدينارين!! والذي وقفت عليه فباع إحداهما بدينار! ولو كان باعها بدينارين لدفع إلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم دينارين وشاة، أليس كذلك؟
Showing the 12 most recent of 18 posts we hold for @alshafeia_police. 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.
Citation-graph rank — 539,625 of 1,550,164entries 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.
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.
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 16 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“شرطي 👮♂️ المذهب الشافعي” (@alshafeia_police), 998 subscribers as measured 16 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/alshafeia_police.
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.