Channel
@javohir_writes1
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
2,441subscribers
+166 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1002869835304 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @javohir_writes1 |
| Created | Between 1 June 2025 and 30 September 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 16 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 6 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 16 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/javohir_writes1 |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 16 Aug 2026, 16:46 | 2,441 | -45 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 05:25 | 2,486 | +148 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 15:36 | 2,338 | +54 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 00:50 | 2,284 | +9 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 20:18 | 2,275 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 19:17 | 2,275 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 6 August 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 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 | 20 (6 August 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 2,501 |
| Reactions total | 105 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 20:18 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.
105 reactions across 20 posts, in 5 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 31.4% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🔥 | 33 | 31.4% | |
| ❤ | 32 | 30.5% | |
| 👍 | 23 | 21.9% | |
| ⚡ | 16 | 15.2% | |
| 👏 | 1 | 0.952% |
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 20 of the 20 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 105reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 6 August 2026 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.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @javohir_writes1. 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 20 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 6 August 2026 to 7 August 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.
❗️❗️❗️❗️24-25-AVGUST "CEFR" imtihonida tushish ehtimoli yuqori bo'lgan barcha savollarni maxfiy kanalimizga joylab bormoqdamiz🤫 🔴 24-AVGUST EHTIMOLIY SAVOLLAR 🔴 25-AVGUST EHTIMOLIY SAVOLLAR #ESLATMA! CEFR C1 teacher tomonidan har kuni 20:00 da Bepul darslar o'tiladi✅
🔥3❤1👍1
—Would you use mirrors to decorate your room? I probably wouldn't, honestly. For me, a mirror is more of a practical item than a decorative one. I prefer decorating my room with, you know, paintings, plants or shelves, because they make the space feel warmer and more personal, you know? And that being said, if it were a stylish mirror, you know, with a unique design, I might consider it as sort of part of the, you k…
🔥2❤1
—Do you usually take a mirror with you? No, not really. I don't see any need for it because I usually check my appearance before leaving home. And if I need to see myself during the day, I can simply use the front camera on my phone. So carrying a separate mirror would just be unnecessary. 🔤🔤🔤➖1️⃣2️⃣ #writingchallenge #part1
🔥2👍1
—How often do you use a mirror? I usually use one in the morning every day, especially before I go to work, right? Since I'm a teacher, I like to make sure I look neat and presentable. I usually check my hair, my clothes, and whether everything looks appropriate before I leave the house, right? 🔤🔤🔤➖1️⃣2️⃣ #writingchallenge #part1
👍1🔥1
—Do you like looking at yourself in a mirror? Not particularly. I only use a mirror when I need to check my appearance, rather than, you know, admire myself. The only exception is after getting a fresh haircut because, like most people, I enjoy the way I look, you know, I enjoy seeing how different I look after a fresh haircut. 🔤🔤🔤➖1️⃣2️⃣ #writingchallenge #part1
⚡2👍2
—Do you use a mirror before buying clothes? Yes, absolutely. I always try clothes on and look in the mirror before deciding whether to buy them or not. Sometimes an outfit looks great on the hanger, but it might not suit you once you wear it, right? So, checking in the mirror helps me, you know, make a better decision. 🔤🔤🔤➖1️⃣2️⃣ #writingchallenge #part1
❤2👍2⚡1
Do you think a mirror is a good decoration? Yes, it can be, as long as it's chosen carefully, right? A well-designed mirror can make a room look more sort of elegant, and it can even make the room look more spacious, right? But if it doesn't match the overall style of the room, it might sort of look out of place rather than, you know, attractive. 🔤🔤🔤➖1️⃣2️⃣ #writingchallenge #part1
❤2🔥2⚡1
Have you ever bought a mirror? Yes, I have. When we were, you know, renovating our house, I was put in charge of buying many of the household items, including mirrors. I visited a few stores, compared the quality and prices, and eventually chose the ones that matched the style of our home. 🔤🔤🔤➖1️⃣2️⃣ #writingchallenge #part1
❤2🔥2⚡1
The bar chart compares the rate of joblessness among women in England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland between 2013 and 2014. Overall, all parts of the UK experienced a decline in their figures, except Scotland. Additionally, the most notable change could be observed in Northern Ireland, while the opposite was true for England. Focusing on the figures that exhibited a decrease first, Northern Ireland was the o…
🔥3👍2⚡1❤1
Today's graph Go - ⚡️
⚡6👍1🔥1
Megacities: humanity's greatest invention, or a disaster we're all just living in? Half the world already lives in cities — and the biggest ones are forcing us to ask if bigger is actually better. 🔤🔤🔤➖1️⃣2️⃣ #articlechallenge #challenge
🔥3❤1
Research shows that increasing number of people are now living in mega-cities of more than 20 million inhabitants. Is it this a positive or negative development? It is undeniably true that a significantly higher number of individuals are now residing in mega-cities with more than 20 million citizens. While this phenomenon entails certain drawbacks, such as environmental degradation and accumulation of economic and s…
❤5🔥2⚡1
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @javohir_writes1. 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 — 594,857 of 1,480,975entries 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 3 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.
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.
“Javohir Writes | Speaks | IELTS 8.5” (@javohir_writes1), 2,441 subscribers as measured 16 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/javohir_writes1.
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.