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 10 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 64% 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.
Growth
65 measurements spanning 97 days, net -1,209. 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 22,141–23,712 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 65
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
11 Nov 2026, 20:59
22,322
-17
9 Nov 2026, 21:47
22,339
-26
8 Nov 2026, 10:14
22,365
-20
7 Nov 2026, 01:37
22,385
-15
6 Nov 2026, 03:35
22,400
-13
5 Nov 2026, 04:45
22,413
-7
4 Nov 2026, 03:07
22,420
-13
3 Nov 2026, 06:08
22,433
-6
2 Nov 2026, 09:25
22,439
-14
1 Nov 2026, 07:39
22,453
-7
31 Oct 2026, 10:07
22,460
-10
30 Oct 2026, 09:16
22,470
-12
29 Oct 2026, 11:27
22,482
-15
28 Oct 2026, 10:50
22,497
-15
27 Oct 2026, 10:19
22,512
-10
26 Oct 2026, 12:48
22,522
-2
25 Oct 2026, 13:56
22,524
-8
24 Oct 2026, 10:56
22,532
-21
23 Oct 2026, 08:49
22,553
-7
22 Oct 2026, 12:16
22,560
first reading
Engagement
226 posts held, back to 1 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 105 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
10.5%
avg views ÷ 22,322 subscribers
Avg views / post
2,340
62 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.393%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
62
of 226 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 11 November 2026
Posts held
226 (1 August 2026 – 11 November 2026)
Views total
145,128
Reactions total
570
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
11 Nov 2026, 15:16 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
Video runtime
25m 45s
Average length
39s
Measured directly from 40 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.
Reaction mix
2,412 reactions across 226 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 39.0% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👍
941
39.0%
❤
765
31.7%
👎
292
12.1%
😱
191
7.92%
👏
159
6.59%
🎉
64
2.65%
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 226 of the 226 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 2,412 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 226 most recent posts we hold, published 1 August 2026 to 11 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: 2 of 62 posts held from the last 30 days (3.23%) 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).
الادعاء الذي يزعم وفاة أحمد هويدي، مراسل صحيفة «زمان الوصل»، نتيجة تعرضه للتعذيب أثناء احتجازه، ادعاء غير صحيح.
إذ أكد رئيس تحرير الصحيفة، فتحي بيوض، أن هويدي بصحة جيدة، وأنه يُعامل معاملة إنسانية، مشيراً إلى أنه من المقرر عرضه على القضاء اليوم الأربعاء 11 تشرين الثاني/نوفمبر 2026. كما نفت مصادر مقربة من عائلة هويدي في دير الزور، تحدثت إلى منصة «تأكد»، صحة الأنباء المتداولة بشأن وفاته.
التفاصيل 👇
https://www.verif…
اعتذر محافظ الرقة عبد الرحمن سلامة عن تصريحاته بشأن خالد المرعي، خلال لقاء في حلب بحضور قائد الأمن الداخلي محمد عبد الغني. وأكد أن التنسيق مع "لواء الباقر" هدف إلى تحييده، فيما رفض عدد من الناشطين المدعوين حضور اللقاء، وفق مصادر "تأكد".
التفاصيل 👇
https://www.verify-sy.com/ar/factcheck/raqqa-governor-apology-aleppo-activists-boycott
الادعاء بأن سهير الأتاسي، الرئيسة السابقة لوحدة تنسيق الدعم التابعة للائتلاف الوطني السوري، اعترفت باختلاس أموال مخصصة للمساعدات الإنسانية أو استخدامها لشراء عقارات في الخارج، وبوجود وثائق حديثة تثبت هذه المزاعم، ادعاء ملفّق.
أظهر تحقق منصة "تأكد" أن الادعاء ليس حديثاً، إذ يعود تداوله إلى عام 2015، عندما نشرت صحيفة "الديار" اللبنانية معلومات نسبت فيها إلى الأتاسي اعترافات باختلاس أموال المساعدات وشراء عقارات في الخا…
أغلقت قوات "الحرس الوطني" ثلاثة مكاتب مرتبطة بـ"وحدات حماية المرأة" في السويداء، وسط اتهامات بمحاولات تجنيد وجمع معلومات والترويج للاندماج مع دمشق.
التفاصيل 👇
https://www.verify-sy.com/ar/factcheck/national-guard-closes-ypj-linked-offices-suwayda
الادعاء بأن الفيديو المرفق يوثق احتجاجات شعبية حديثة وقطعاً للطرقات في مدينة الطبقة بريف الرقة احتجاجاً على أزمة مازوت التدفئة، هو ادعاء مضلل.
أظهر التحقق أن المقطع يوثق إغلاق الطرقات بالإطارات المشتعلة من قبل أصحاب البسطات والمحال التجارية في سوق الطبقة الشهر الماضي وذلك رفضاً لقرارات البلدية إزالة البسطات وفرض الضرائب.
التفاصيل 👇
https://www.verify-sy.com/ar/factcheck/old-video-al-Tabqa-heating-protests
الادعاء بأن الصورة المتداولة على صفحات "فيسبوك" تعود إلى حسيبة علي الأسد، الأخت غير الشقيقة لحافظ الأسد، ادعاء مضلّل. إذ تبيّن أن الصورة تعود إلى الكاتبة والناشطة السياسية حسيبة عبد الرحمن، التي تُعدّ من أوائل المعتقلات السياسيات في سوريا، حيث اعتقلتها الأجهزة الأمنية التابعة لنظام حافظ الأسد أكثر من مرة خلال ثمانينيات وتسعينيات القرن العشرين، بسبب نشاطها السياسي المعارض لحكمه.
التفاصيل 👇
https://www.verify-sy.com/…
نفت وزارة النقل السورية صحة الأنباء المتداولة بشأن حجز المركبات لمجرد انتهاء مدة ترخيصها، مؤكدة عدم صدور أي قرار رسمي بهذا الخصوص. وجاء النفي عقب انتشار شائعات تسببت بازدحام في مديريات النقل، داعية المواطنين إلى اعتماد مصادرها الرسمية للحصول على المعلومات.
هل لديك شك في صحة خبر أو معلومة؟ تواصل مع "الوكيل الذكي" عبر واتساب للتحقق منها 👇
wa.me/4797256889
قال المسؤول في الهيئة العامة للمنافذ والجمارك السورية، مازن علوش إن السلطات التركية سمحت لمواطني عشر دول عربية بالعبور عبر المنافذ البرية مع سوريا، وفق نظام التأشيرات المعمول به، دون إذن مسبق إضافي. ويشمل القرار البحرين والإمارات وقطر والكويت ولبنان والسعودية وعُمان والأردن واليمن وفلسطين.
وأوضح علوش أن السوريين الحاصلين على جنسية أجنبية يمكنهم مغادرة سوريا براً عبر تركيا إلى دولة إقامتهم، بغض النظر عن طريقة دخولهم،…
هل يكفي النفي الرسمي للحكم على صحة المعلومات؟
من السفارة السورية في مدريد إلى وزارة الثقافة وملف القمح، كشفت وقائع موثّقة عن تحديات تواجه المؤسسات الإعلامية عند الاعتماد على التصريحات الرسمية وحدها.
نستعرض ثلاث حالات تطرح سؤالاً مهماً: متى نثق بالتصريح الرسمي، ومتى نحتاج إلى أدلة مستقلة؟
المصدر الرسمي مهم، لكن التحقق لا يتوقف عنده.
اقرأ التقرير الكامل:
https://www.verify-sy.com/ar/report/official-sources-media-c…
الوثيقة التي يجري تداولها بزعم أنها مرسوم رئاسي يقضي بنقل العاصمة السورية من دمشق إلى إدلب مفبركة، إذ أظهر التحقق أنها تستند إلى تصميم المرسوم رقم 192 لعام 2025، المتعلق بشؤون طلاب الجامعات، بعد تغيير تاريخه ومضمونه. ولم ينشر الإعلام الرسمي أي قرار بنقل العاصمة.
التفاصيل 👇
https://www.verify-sy.com/ar/factcheck/syria-capital-damascus-idlib-fake-decree
الادعاء بأن الفيديو المرفق يوثّق مظاهرة خرجت اليوم، 6 تشرين الثاني/نوفمبر 2026، في دمشق ضد الرئيس أحمد الشرع، ادعاء مضلل.
أظهر التحقق أن المقطع يعود إلى مظاهرة خرجت في آذار/مارس 2024 بمدينة بنش في ريف إدلب، ضد "هيئة تحرير الشام" التي كان يقودها أحمد الشرع، المعروف آنذاك بلقب "أبو محمد الجولاني". كما نفى مراسل "تأكد" في دمشق خروج أي مظاهرات مناهضة للشرع في المدينة مؤخراً.
التفاصيل 👇
https://www.verify-sy.com/ar/fac…
الادعاء المرفق بصورة، والذي يزعم أنها تُظهر شق الجيش الإسرائيلي طريقاً يربط بلدة يحمر بمحافظة درعا جنوبي سوريا، مضلل.
إذ أظهر التحقق أن الصورة توثق أعمال شق طريق عسكري ينفذها الجيش الإسرائيلي في محيط بلدة يحمر الشقيف بقضاء النبطية جنوبي لبنان، من منطقة قلعة صافيتا باتجاه نهر زوطر الشرقية ونهر الليطاني وبلدة الطيبة.
كما أظهر التحقق الجغرافي أن أعمال شق الطريق تقع داخل الأراضي اللبنانية، ولا توجد أدلة على امتداد الطر…
👍4❤2
Showing the 12 most recent of 226 posts we hold for @verify_sy. 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
@verify_sy 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 November 2026
Most recent edit
8 November 2026
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 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.
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.
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 19 September 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.
صور متحركة مضحكة @Funny_Comics1 · 28,997 Telegram ranks this channel #29 of 56 here — alongside 55 others — read 8 September 2026
GOAL - Syria منظمة جول الإنسانية - سوريا @goalsy · 25,360 Telegram ranks this channel #42 of 56 here — alongside 55 others — read 12 September 2026
ميمز / رياكشنات @reactttionz · 34,497 Telegram ranks this channel #48 of 60 here — alongside 59 others — read 18 September 2026
وظائف في سوريا ودول الجوار @JobsvacanciesinSyriaandTurkey · 33,694 Telegram ranks this channel #51 of 60 here — alongside 59 others — read 5 September 2026
Noor - Master English @noormasterenglish · 32,960 Telegram ranks this channel #67 of 70 here — alongside 69 others — read 4 September 2026
This channel appears in 5 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 11 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“تَأكّدْ” (@verify_sy), 22,322 subscribers as measured 11 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/verify_sy.
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.