National news — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 11 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 45% 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 1 other registered channel. 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 (5 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. None of the 0 matches recorded here fall after that date, so for this entry we cannot say whether any of them carried a credit. The duplication is measured; the absence of attribution is not.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 63 comparable posts for this entry, running 18 July 2026 to 5 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).
Recorded under the key clone_source, last confirmed 14 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.
Growth
35 measurements spanning 96 days, net +2,589. 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 1,358–15,278 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 35
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
12 Nov 2026, 02:08
6,352
-85
7 Nov 2026, 20:09
6,437
-96
4 Nov 2026, 11:09
6,533
-148
1 Nov 2026, 03:59
6,681
-419
28 Oct 2026, 19:17
7,100
-564
25 Oct 2026, 10:46
7,664
-247
22 Oct 2026, 05:57
7,911
-198
19 Oct 2026, 01:36
8,109
-241
15 Oct 2026, 19:20
8,350
-257
13 Oct 2026, 02:00
8,607
-313
6 Oct 2026, 13:21
8,920
-413
29 Sept 2026, 07:36
9,333
-529
19 Sept 2026, 13:19
9,862
-199
17 Sept 2026, 00:21
10,061
-203
15 Sept 2026, 04:36
10,264
-129
13 Sept 2026, 16:02
10,393
-198
11 Sept 2026, 20:01
10,591
-431
9 Sept 2026, 08:14
11,022
-1,301
6 Sept 2026, 03:16
12,323
-79
3 Sept 2026, 22:22
12,402
first reading
Engagement
75 posts held, back to 18 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 24 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
6.67%
avg views ÷ 6,352 subscribers
Avg views / post
424
24 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.64%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
24
of 75 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 19 of 24 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 5 November 2026
Posts held
75 (18 July 2026 – 5 November 2026)
Views total
10,172
Reactions total
150
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
7 Nov 2026, 06:15 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.
Reaction mix
262 reactions across 50 posts, in 2 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 81.7% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👍
214
81.7%
👎
48
18.3%
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 50 of the 75 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 262 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 75 most recent posts we hold, published 18 July 2026 to 5 November 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.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 0 of 24 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).
💢 منطق ما با دشمن تحمیل است و زور؛ چه بجنگیم چه مذاکره کنیم
🔹 حدود یک ماه پیش در همین رسانه متنی با عنوان «در نقد نظریه امتیاز بزرگ، حفظ بقا» منتشر شد که توضیح میداد نگاه امیدوارانه به دشمن تا چه اندازه اشتباه است و چرا دشمن با امتیاز گرفتن از ایران، از ما دست برنمیدارد. حالا و پس از پیام رهبر معظم انقلاب و تاکید دوباره ایشان بر همین امر، باید به آن سادهلوحانی که فکر میکنند میتوان با امتیاز دادن به دشمن قدارهک…
♨️ شکست سهمگین به عنوان بخشی از تاوان ترامپ
🔸 آنچه در انتخابات میاندورهای آمریکا رخ داد، فراتر از خوشبینانهترین انتظارات قبلی برای دموکراتها بود. شکست جمهوریخواهان در چند ایالت همیشه قرمز مانند تگزاس، کارولینای جنوبی و ارکانزاس پیام سیاسی این شکست را به بیش از یک نارضایتی اقتصادی تبدیل کرده است. واضح است که در اصل دشمنی با ایران، تفاوت ماهوی میان دموکرات و جمهوری خواه وجود ندارد اما قطعا این پیروزی نتایج قابل ت…
💢 چرا از قالیباف ناامید شدند؟
🔹 نامه ونس به آقای محسن رضایی، نشان دهندهی نوعی ناامیدی آمریکاییها از قالیباف است. آنها به این نتیجه رسیدهاند که نمیتوان در مذاکره و طرفیت با قالیباف به امتیازاتی که میخواهند دست پیدا کنند. آنها دیدهاند که قالیباف در اسلامآباد حتی حاضر به مذاکره درباره مسئله هستهای نشد. در متن تفاهمنامه هم آنچه ایران میخواست را به دست آورد تا جاییکه تمام رسانههای جریان اصلی آمریکا و بسیاری از…
🔻 آقای ایزدی چگونه استدلال میکند؟
🔸 آقای فواد ایزدی در متنی که مشخص نیست مقدمه و موخره آن چیست، مطالبی نوشته تا گزاره «هم میجنگیم و هم مذاکره میکنیم» را رد کند. او با این جمله از ترامپ شروع کرده که او میگوید آمریکا و ایران در حال مذاکره هستند و ایرانیان خواستار این مذاکرهاند. سپس نکاتی را بیان کرده که مثلا قرار بوده از این جمله ترامپ برداشت شود اما ارتباط برخی از این نکات با آن جمله واقعا نامشخص است. مثلا این ج…
♨️ تعمیق در دکترین و تاکتیک
🔹 دستورات فرمانده کل قوا به فرماندهان عالی نظامی کشور حاوی نکات فراوانی است. یکی از نکات مهم این دستورات، موضوع تعمیق دفاع بومی در دو حوزه «دکترین» و «تاکتیک» فارغ از نبرد آتی است. مسئلهای که در کنار مباحث اخیر در زمینه احتمال تغییر موضع درباره سلاح هستهای، معنادار میشود چراکه افراد بسیار ملاحظهکار و دقیقی مانند آقای حاجعلیاکبری نیز به چنین مسئلهای اشاره کرده و درباره آن صحبت کرده…
🔻 یاران جلیلی برای تخریب قالیباف، هم به ترامپ مشروعیت میدهند و هم از مذاکره حمایت میکنند
🔸 در دو روز گذشته، برخی رسانههای زرد و سوپرانقلابی، خطی رسانهای را پیگیری میکنند که برای مطلعین تمسخرآمیز و خندهدار است؛ تلاشی در جهت معنادار کردن نامه ونس به محسن رضایی در جهت تخریب قالیباف. اصل ماجرا در ریاست قالیباف بر تیم مذاکراتی ایران واضح است و نیازی به تکذیب و توضیح نمیبینیم. اما نکته اساسی در این ماجرا، نوع واکنش…
🔻 یاران جلیلی برای تخریب قالیباف، هم به ترامپ مشروعیت میدهند و هم از مذاکره حمایت میکنند
📮 نواصولگرا؛ رسانهی عقلانیت و کارآمدی در بستر گفتمان انقلاب اسلامی
🔗 @noosoolgara
👎1
Showing the 12 most recent of 75 posts we hold for @noosoolgara. 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 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.
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.
Football Daf news 📰 @football_Dafnews · 20,952 Telegram ranks this channel #12 of 58 here — alongside 57 others — read 23 September 2026
تجارت جهانی @WorldTradeMedia · 207,712 Telegram ranks this channel #38 of 74 here — alongside 73 others — read 17 September 2026
خبرگزاری موج @mojnews_ir · 42,762 Telegram ranks this channel #56 of 94 here — alongside 93 others — read 4 September 2026
اتاق خبر @newsroom_irr · 86,685 Telegram ranks this channel #60 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 18 August 2026
محمدباقر قالیباف @ghalibaf · 73,441 Telegram ranks this channel #62 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 22 August 2026
گویا نیوز @Gouya_news · 32,989 Telegram ranks this channel #66 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 4 September 2026
تلویزیون روایت فردا | RFT @revayatfarda · 391,363 Telegram ranks this channel #74 of 98 here — alongside 97 others — read 11 August 2026
اخبار مجلس شورای اسلامی @majles · 70,865 Telegram ranks this channel #79 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 18 August 2026
روزپلاس @roozplus_ir · 199,913 Telegram ranks this channel #89 of 98 here — alongside 97 others — read 11 August 2026
This channel appears in 9 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.
“نواصولگرا” (@noosoolgara), 6,352 subscribers as measured 12 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/noosoolgara.
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.