Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for ielts.farhad

Channel

ielts.farhad

@ieltsfarhad

On this record: Topic · Observations · Also posting the same content · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry

9,281subscribers

-38 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001416585409
TypeChannel
Username@ieltsfarhad
CreatedBetween 1 April 2019 and 31 October 2021 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live9 September 2026
Measurements held12
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 9 September 2026
On Telegramt.me/ieltsfarhad

Topic

Education — 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 100% 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.

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 word for word 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)
Posted firstThenOverlapGap
@ieltsfarhad/5233 · this entry1 Jun 2026, 05:33 UTC@rozanaielts1/84921 Jun 2026, 05:33 UTC1.00under a minute
@ieltsfarhad/5234 · this entry5 Jun 2026, 12:15 UTC@rozanaielts1/84965 Jun 2026, 12:16 UTC1.0072 seconds
@ieltsfarhad/5238 · this entry24 Jun 2026, 19:15 UTC@rozanaielts1/849724 Jun 2026, 19:15 UTC1.00under a minute
@ieltsfarhad/5241 · this entry29 Jun 2026, 17:49 UTC@rozanaielts1/849929 Jun 2026, 17:51 UTC1.002 minutes
@ieltsfarhad/5249 · this entry30 Jul 2026, 11:52 UTC@rozanaielts1/850730 Jul 2026, 11:53 UTC1.00under a minute
Every channel this entry shares post bodies with
ChannelMatching postsText overlapTypical gapPublished first
@rozanaielts112 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed)1.00under a minutethis entry (111)

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 1 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 13 comparable posts for this entry, running 1 June 2026 to 7 August 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).

Across the whole group of 2, the earliest publisher we hold is @ieltsfarhad — which is this entry. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.

Recorded under the key clone_source, last confirmed 7 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.

Also posting the same content

This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 1 other registered channel, found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register. That matching has been checked by hand against the live Telegram pages and found reliable — 0 wrong of 45 pairs re-read.

Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown. The same hand-check found that reading wrong 18 of 45 times — 60%, no better than a coin flip — because it depends on how deep our own crawl happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Word-for-word matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.

Growth

9,2789,3199,298.56 August 2026 — 9,319 subscribers7 August 2026 — 9,316 subscribers10 August 2026 — 9,300 subscribers13 August 2026 — 9,294 subscribers16 August 2026 — 9,290 subscribers20 August 2026 — 9,284 subscribers23 August 2026 — 9,278 subscribers25 August 2026 — 9,288 subscribers28 August 2026 — 9,294 subscribers1 September 2026 — 9,300 subscribers4 September 2026 — 9,294 subscribers9 September 2026 — 9,281 subscribers9,2816 August 20269 September 2026
12 measurements spanning 34 days, net -38. 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 9,272–9,325 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
9 Sept 2026, 03:379,281-13
4 Sept 2026, 02:159,294-6
1 Sept 2026, 00:399,300+6
28 Aug 2026, 19:479,294+6
25 Aug 2026, 21:569,288+10
23 Aug 2026, 00:069,278-6
20 Aug 2026, 00:089,284-6
16 Aug 2026, 21:269,290-4
13 Aug 2026, 17:479,294-6
10 Aug 2026, 15:049,300-16
7 Aug 2026, 05:459,316-3
6 Aug 2026, 05:479,319first reading

Engagement

39 posts held, back to 1 June 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 32 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
2.76%
avg views ÷ 9,281 subscribers
Avg views / post
257
16 posts measured
Reaction rate
2.73%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
17
of 39 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 13 of 16 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 28 August 2026
Posts held39 (1 June 202628 August 2026)
Views total4,105
Reactions total85
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken29 Aug 2026, 07:55 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
22m 34s
Average length
7m 31s

Measured directly from 3 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

189 reactions across 32 posts, in 8 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 46.6% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
8846.6%
👍4021.2%
👌2513.2%
🔥147.41%
🥰147.41%
🕊42.12%
🎉31.59%
😍10.529%

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 33 of the 39 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 206 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 39 most recent posts we hold, published 1 June 2026 to 28 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.

Recent posts

28 Aug 2026, 07:36 UTC169 views7 reactionsread 29 August 2026

امروزه کبریت‌های کتابی رایج‌ترین نوع کبریت در آمریکا هستند و ۹۰ درصد آن‌ها به‌صورت رایگان توسط هتل‌ها، رستوران‌ها و دیگران توزیع می‌شوند. Keywords & Paraphrases: • today → nowadays / currently / at present • book matches → matchbooks • most widely used → most commonly used / most popular / most prevalent • type → kind / category / variety • widely used → commonly used / extensively used / frequently used • handed o

3👍2🥰1😍1

28 Aug 2026, 07:36 UTC71 views4 reactionsread 29 August 2026

9 However, since white phosphorus is a deadly poison, from 1845 match-makers exposed to its fumes succumbed to a disease that eats away jaw-bones. معنی: با این حال، از آنجا که فسفر سفید یک سم کشنده است، از سال ۱۸۴۵ کبریت‌سازانی که در معرض بخارات آن قرار می‌گرفتند، به بیماری‌ای مبتلا می‌شدند که استخوان‌های فک را از بین می‌برد. Keywords & Paraphrases: • however → nevertheless / nonetheless / despite this • since →

4

28 Aug 2026, 07:36 UTC114 views4 reactionsread 29 August 2026

• technology → technological development / technical advancement • match technology → technology related to matches • safety standards → safety regulations / safety requirements / safety rules • Europe → European countries • less advanced → behind / underdeveloped / lagging • standards → regulations / requirements / criteria • lag behind → fail to keep pace with / remain behind ⸻ 14 It wasn’t until 1900 that the D

2👍1🥰1

28 Aug 2026, 07:35 UTC53 views2 reactionsread 29 August 2026

کبریت‌های Congreve که هر جعبه آن‌ها یک شیلینگ قیمت داشت، چوب‌های کوچکی بودند که با گوگرد پوشانده شده و نوک آن‌ها به کلرات پتاسیم آغشته شده بود. Keywords & Paraphrases: • costing → priced at / selling for / having a price of • a shilling a box → one shilling per box • splints → small sticks / pieces of wood • coated with → covered with / treated with / layered with • sulfur → chemical substance • tipped with → cover

2

28 Aug 2026, 07:35 UTC101 views2 reactionsread 29 August 2026

1 The quest for a practical match really began after 1781 when a group of French chemists came up with the Phosphoric Candle or Ethereal Match, a sealed glass tube containing a twist of paper tipped with phosphorus. تلاش برای ساخت یک کبریت کاربردی واقعاً پس از سال ۱۷۸۱ آغاز شد؛ زمانی که گروهی از شیمیدانان فرانسوی کبریت Phosphoric Candle یا Ethereal Match را ابداع کردند؛ یک لوله شیشه‌ای دربسته که حاوی تکه‌ای کاغذ با

2

27 Aug 2026, 16:05 UTC186 views9 reactionsread 29 August 2026

A spark, a flint: How fire leapt to life Paragraph 1 با قیمتی معادل چند صد پوند به ازای هر اونس، اولین کبریت‌ها بسیار گران‌قیمت بودند. Paraphraseهای مهم: equivalent of = equal to = معادلِ several hundred = hundreds of = چند صد per ounce = for each ounce = به ازای هر اونس expensive = costly = گران‌قیمت نکته: per + unit یعنی «به ازای هر واحد» per year = هر سال / سالانه per person = به ازای هر نفر per ounce = به ازا

👍4👌3🥰2

27 Aug 2026, 16:04 UTC165 viewsread 29 August 2026
Photo

امروز پراگراف اول و دوم این صفحه کار میشه

25 Aug 2026, 11:05 UTC248 views12 reactionsread 29 August 2026

• the main method → the primary method / principal technique • fire-lighting → starting a fire / igniting a fire • until → up to the time of • the mid 19th century → the middle of the nineteenth century ⭐ remain + noun/adjective خیلی مهم است: remained the main method → continued to be the main method ⸻ Fire-lighting was revolutionised by the discovery of phosphorus, isolated in 1669 by a German alchemist trying t

8🎉1👌1👍1🔥1

25 Aug 2026, 11:05 UTC204 views8 reactionsread 29 August 2026

ادامه متن شماره یک از کتاب کمبریج شماره یک با فرهاد پرهام نیا در کانال آیلتس فرهاد @ieltsfarhad The Ancient Greeks used lenses or concave mirrors to concentrate the sun’s rays and produce fire. یونانیان باستان از عدسی‌ها یا آینه‌های مقعر استفاده می‌کردند تا پرتوهای خورشید را متمرکز کنند و آتش ایجاد کنند. Paraphrases: • Ancient Greeks → people in Ancient Greece • used → made use of / employed • lenses → optical

4🔥2👌1🥰1

25 Aug 2026, 10:12 UTCviews —

ielts.farhad pinned «متن اول ریدینگ یک کتاب شماره یک آیلتس A Spark, a Flint: How Fire Leapt to Life A spark, a flint: How fire leapt to life یک جرقه، یک سنگ چخماق: چگونه آتش پا به عرصهٔ وجود گذاشت Humanity’s steps towards a life-enhancing technology گام‌های بشر به سوی یک…»

24 Aug 2026, 20:42 UTC299 views14 reactionsread 29 August 2026

کتاب شماره یک کمبریج متن اول پراگراف دوم Paragraph 2 How and where man learnt how to produce flame at will is unknown. اینکه انسان چگونه و کجا یاد گرفت هر زمان که بخواهد آتش ایجاد کند، مشخص نیست. It was probably a secondary invention, accidentally made during tool-making operations with wood or stone. احتمالاً این کار یک اختراع ثانویه بوده که به‌طور تصادفی هنگام ساخت ابزار با چوب یا سنگ به وجود آمده است. Studie

🔥7👍5🥰2

23 Aug 2026, 23:43 UTC365 views11 reactionsread 29 August 2026

متن اول ریدینگ یک کتاب شماره یک آیلتس A Spark, a Flint: How Fire Leapt to Life A spark, a flint: How fire leapt to life یک جرقه، یک سنگ چخماق: چگونه آتش پا به عرصهٔ وجود گذاشت Humanity’s steps towards a life-enhancing technology گام‌های بشر به سوی یک فناوری بهبوددهندهٔ زندگی ⸻ Paragraph 1 To early man, fire was a divine gift randomly delivered in the form of lightning, forest fire or burning lava. برای انسا

👍74

Showing the 12 most recent of 39 posts we hold for @ieltsfarhad. 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.

Polls

The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.

23 Aug 2026, 15:48 UTCAnonymous Poll38 voters

دوست دارید کتاب های ریدینگ آیلتس اینجا براتون آنالیز کنم ؟ ( فارسی و پرافریزهاش بگم ؟)

  1. نه موافقم نیستم0%

Shares as published, totalling 0%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none. The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.

The shares need not add up to 100. Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.

Read from the 39 most recent posts we hold, published 1 June 2026 to 28 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.

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 2 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.

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.

English online
@Eng_Online · 36,692
Telegram ranks this channel #39 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 1 September 2026

This channel appears in 1 seed channel's Telegram-generated recommendation list 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 9 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“ielts.farhad” (@ieltsfarhad), 9,281 subscribers as measured 9 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/ieltsfarhad.

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.