Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for Научные журналы и базы данных (НЖБД)

Channel

Научные журналы и базы данных (НЖБД)

@rujournals

On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry

5,820subscribers

+152 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-1001830431095
TypeChannel
Username@rujournals
DescriptionНовости и аналитика в сфере научной коммуникации, научные журналы, базы данных научных журналов. Прислать новость, сотрудничество: @RuJourn
Created4 March 2023 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel)
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live4 November 2026
Measurements held22
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 4 November 2026
On Telegramt.me/rujournals

Topic

Education — 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 12 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 97% 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

5,6685,8205,7446 August 2026 — 5,668 subscribers6 August 2026 — 5,668 subscribers9 August 2026 — 5,670 subscribers12 August 2026 — 5,668 subscribers16 August 2026 — 5,677 subscribers19 August 2026 — 5,680 subscribers22 August 2026 — 5,687 subscribers28 August 2026 — 5,697 subscribers31 August 2026 — 5,701 subscribers3 September 2026 — 5,705 subscribers9 September 2026 — 5,722 subscribers12 September 2026 — 5,743 subscribers16 September 2026 — 5,742 subscribers30 September 2026 — 5,772 subscribers7 October 2026 — 5,784 subscribers13 October 2026 — 5,798 subscribers16 October 2026 — 5,803 subscribers22 October 2026 — 5,806 subscribers26 October 2026 — 5,808 subscribers29 October 2026 — 5,806 subscribers1 November 2026 — 5,812 subscribers4 November 2026 — 5,820 subscribers6 August 20264 November 2026
22 measurements spanning 90 days, net +152. 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 5,645–5,843 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 22
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
4 Nov 2026, 10:255,820+8
1 Nov 2026, 03:265,812+6
29 Oct 2026, 10:095,806-2
26 Oct 2026, 06:255,808+2
22 Oct 2026, 22:545,806+3
16 Oct 2026, 09:385,803+5
13 Oct 2026, 13:595,798+14
7 Oct 2026, 05:575,784+12
30 Sept 2026, 14:195,772+30
16 Sept 2026, 11:585,742-1
12 Sept 2026, 20:385,743+21
9 Sept 2026, 00:595,722+17
3 Sept 2026, 22:195,705+4
31 Aug 2026, 21:395,701+4
28 Aug 2026, 15:575,697+10
22 Aug 2026, 09:565,687+7
19 Aug 2026, 05:065,680+3
16 Aug 2026, 02:075,677+9
12 Aug 2026, 14:045,668-2
9 Aug 2026, 20:525,670first reading

Engagement

41 posts held, back to 15 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 9 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
30.5%
avg views ÷ 5,820 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,780
20 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.96%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
20
of 41 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
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 3 November 2026
Posts held41 (15 July 2026 – 3 November 2026)
Views total35,528
Reactions total341
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken4 Nov 2026, 17:01 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

Photos
≈478
Videos
≈2
Links
≈1,010

Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 4 November 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.

Reaction mix

774 reactions across 41 posts, in 11 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 39.8% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
👍30839.8%
🤡12916.7%
❤10814.0%
😁8811.4%
💩425.43%
🤔273.49%
👎232.97%
🔥222.84%
🤯141.81%
😭70.904%
🙏60.775%

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 41 of the 41 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 774 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 41 most recent posts we hold, published 15 July 2026 to 3 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.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
5
across the posts below
Posts paid on
5
of 41 we hold a reading for · 12%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @rujournals. 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 41 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 15 July 2026 to 3 November 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.

Recent posts

Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 1 of 20 posts held from the last 30 days (5.00%) 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).

3 Nov 2026, 06:02 UTC678 views8 reactionsread 4 November 2026

Уважаемые коллеги! Отвечаю на вопрос, многократно задававшийся в нашем чате по поводу приема журналов в Перечень ВАК, а также внесению изменений в коды специальностей, переименований, форматов. Получила подтверждение, что по крайней мере до конца 2027 г. ВАК принимает заявки и вносит изменения в Перечень. Правила формирования перечня и Требования к изданиям для включения в Перечень, утвержденные Приказом Минобрнауки …

👍8

2 Nov 2026, 06:02 UTC≈1,260 views18 reactionsread 4 November 2026
Photo

В ИТМО создали агента, который связывает научные статьи, авторов и программный код Исследователи Института искусственного интеллекта ИТМО создали первый в России открытый инструмент для построения карты научных связей PAUK. Сервис автоматически сопоставляет между собой сведения из разных источников: научные организации, сотрудников, их публикации и программный код, использованный в работе. Он работает как поисковик …

👍14❤3🔥1

30 Oct 2026, 06:02 UTC≈2,050 views53 reactionsread 4 November 2026

Если бы DOI были людьми DOI-оптимист Ссылка не открывается уже третий год. — Ничего, — говорит он. — Издатель просто переехал. Сейчас всё починят. Он верит в лучшее даже тогда, когда домен журнала продаётся с аукциона. DOI-зомби Метаданные есть. Запись в Crossref есть. А самой статьи нет: PDF исчез, сайт умер, архив не сохранился. Он бродит по спискам литературы и пугает библиографов: «Cited by 43… но попробуй меня…

❤28😁19👍5🔥1

29 Oct 2026, 06:02 UTC≈1,340 views10 reactionsread 4 November 2026

Приглашаем на вебинар «Сайт журнала в эпоху ИИ: индексация, оптимизация, целостность смысла»! Вебинар проводится в рамках Образовательной программы Elpub. Вебинар открытый, мы будем рады видеть всех желающих. 🗓 30 октября в 11 часов по московскому времени. ✍🏻Регистрация: https://pruffme.com/landing/elpub/AIwebsite Спикер: Зельдина Марина Михайловна, руководитель проекта Элпаб.Образование, НЭИКОН 🗓Искусственный ин…

👍5💩3👎1🤡1

28 Oct 2026, 06:01 UTC≈1,650 views14 reactionsread 4 November 2026

Китай заплатил $7 млн за отозванные статьи в журналах Исследователи из Гонконгского политехнического университета Шаосюн Брайан Сюй и Гуанвэй Ху оценили масштаб потерь китайских научных фондов из-за публикаций, впоследствии отозванных в потенциально хищнических журналах. Авторы проанализировали 82 отозванные статьи, финансировавшиеся материковым Китаем, используя Beall’s List и базу Retraction Watch. По их оценкам,…

🤔7❤3👍2🤡2

27 Oct 2026, 06:02 UTC≈1,290 views9 reactionsread 4 November 2026
Photo

⚡️ Журнал в списке: как устроены национальные системы оценки научных изданий Друзья, приглашаем вас на вебинар с Денисом Косяковым, где мы разберем национальные системы оценки научных изданий и выясним, как журналы попадают в авторитетные списки и рейтинги. Дата и время: 27 октября в 11:00 Тема: Журнал в списке: как устроены национальные системы оценки научных изданий Приглашенный эксперт: Денис Косяков, руководите…

❤4👍3🔥2

26 Oct 2026, 06:02 UTC≈1,450 views13 reactionsread 4 November 2026
Photo

В канале Зоопарк из слоновой кости вышел пост РАНовские журналы больше не ВАКовские? На данный момент журналы РАН, которые входят в RSCI, а это все или практически все журналы РАН, приравниваются к журналам К1 из Перечня ВАК. По нашей информации, более 50 журналов сейчас находятся на этапе рассмотрения заявок в Scopus. #издательствонаука #РАН ___ @rujournals - Научные журналы и базы данных (НЖБД)

👍9🤡2❤1👎1

23 Oct 2026, 06:01 UTC≈2,090 views17 reactionsread 4 November 2026

S.M.Aldoshin, V.P.Ananikov, I.P.Beletskaya, A.A.Berlin, L.B.Boinovich, V.I.Bukhtiyarov, A.A.Voshkin, Yu.G.Gorbunova, K.V.Grigorovich, U.M.Dzhemilev, M.P.Egorov, I.L.Eremenko, V.K.Ivanov, S.N.Kalmykov, V.P.Kolotov, A.L.Maximov, A.M.Muzafarov, B.F.Myasoedov, O.G.Sinyashin, K.A.Solntsev, A.R.Khokhlov, A.Yu.Tsivadze, A.A.Yaroslavov, A.B.Yaroslavtsev, "Искусственный интеллект в подготовке научных статей", Успехи химии, 20…

👍11😭4👎1😁1

22 Oct 2026, 06:02 UTC≈2,130 views44 reactionsread 4 November 2026

Почему индекс Хирша — плохая метрика Индекс Хирша удобен, но плох как универсальная оценка учёного. Он измеряет не качество и вклад в науку, а комбинацию количества публикаций и цитирований. Игнорирует выдающиеся работы. Одна статья с тысячами цитирований почти не повышает h-индекс. Зависит от стажа. Молодой автор с яркими работами проигрывает ветерану с большим массивом публикаций. Не сравним между дисциплинами.…

👍28🤡11❤3👎1💩1

21 Oct 2026, 06:02 UTC≈1,530 views19 reactionsread 4 November 2026
Photo

Развитие российских научных журналов: этапы большого пути и выбор дальнейшей траектории Друзья, приглашаем вас принять участие в вебинаре, посвященном эволюции, текущему состоянию и будущему российской научной периодики. Дата и время: 22 октября в 11:00 Тема: Развитие российских научных журналов: этапы большого пути и выбор дальнейшей траектории Приглашенный эксперт: Ольга Кириллова, президент Ассоциации научных ре…

❤8👍6🔥4🤡1

20 Oct 2026, 06:01 UTC≈1,420 views7 reactionsread 4 November 2026

Informa готовится отделить Taylor & Francis: будущее издательства пока не определено Британская группа Informa объявила о намерении отделить академическое издательство Taylor & Francis, чтобы сосредоточиться на основном бизнесе в сфере B2B-мероприятий. Формальный процесс оценки вариантов разделения уже запущен, однако компания пока не уточнила, будет ли это продажа, выделение в отдельную компанию или иная схема. Ta…

🤔5👍1🙏1

19 Oct 2026, 06:01 UTC≈1,580 views2 reactionsread 4 November 2026

PNAS: 4085 научных статей заподозрили в манипуляции ссылками Международная команда исследователей обнаружила признаки организованной манипуляции цитированием научных статей, произведенных «фабриками статей» — организациями, которые продают сфабрикованные рукописи и услуги по публикации. Исследование опубликовано в научном журнале Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Авторы изучили 33 159 статей в 20 нау…

❤1👍1

Showing the 12 most recent of 41 posts we hold for @rujournals. 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.

Clinical and Experimental Morphology
@cemjornal · 80
4 posts
Путь к успешным публикациям
@publactivity · 194
3 posts
Совет по этике АНРИ
@sovet_po_etike_anri · 729
3 posts
Диссертационный совет
@dissovet · 1,422
2 posts
Элпаб
@elpub · 650
2 posts
Для авторов RJITS
@rjits_authors · 160
2 posts
Канал Ассоциации научных редакторов и издателей - АНРИ
@ANRIRUS · 986
1 post
RUDN.Sci
@RUDN_science · 988
1 post
Публикационная активность
@SPMU_Publications · 1,203
1 post
ВСЕВЕДА🕊
@VseWeda · 13,054
1 post
ДЖУРА
@alexeydzhura · 422
1 post
Смотровая Военврача
@dr_voenvrach · 45,332
1 post
ИЭГТ РАН
@iemt_nalchik · 24
1 post
Институт образовательных стратегий
@instos_ekb · 134
1 post
Журналы Морского гидрофизического института
@journalMHI · 225
1 post
JAMT - Journal of Advanced Materials and Technologies
@journal_amt · 83
1 post
Библиотека для открытой науки | Library for Open Science
@lib_os · 1,027
1 post
Pro.nauku
@pavlichenko_pro · 10,939
1 post
Подосокорский
@podosokorsky · 29,673
1 post
Пульс науки
@pulsescience · 1,989
1 post
Твой рагнарёк
@ragnarrrrrok · 25
1 post
Анастасия Шуба | О научном, лиричном и технологичном
@shuba_lirik · 33
1 post
TSTU Scientific Publications | TDTU Ilmiy nashrlar
@tstupublication · 1,342
1 post
Ученый-Автор-Педагог
@yferf · 1,499
1 post

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 26 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. The 24 listed below are the most frequent namers; the rest are counted above but not each listed.

Named by

Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.

Выше квартилей
@HQhse · 3,368
5 posts
Clinical and Experimental Morphology
@cemjornal · 80
4 posts
Смотровая Военврача
@dr_voenvrach · 45,332
4 posts
Путь к успешным публикациям
@publactivity · 194
4 posts
Диссертационный совет
@dissovet · 1,422
3 posts
Для авторов RJITS
@rjits_authors · 160
3 posts
Совет по этике АНРИ
@sovet_po_etike_anri · 729
3 posts
Элпаб
@elpub · 650
2 posts
Pro.nauku
@pavlichenko_pro · 10,939
2 posts
Пульс науки
@pulsescience · 1,989
2 posts
ДЖУРА
@alexeydzhura · 422
1 post
Геймдев Шрёдингера (Москва)
@gamedev_moscow · 2,113
1 post
ИЭГТ РАН
@iemt_nalchik · 24
1 post
Институт образовательных стратегий
@instos_ekb · 134
1 post
Журналы Морского гидрофизического института
@journalMHI · 225
1 post
Библиотека для открытой науки | Library for Open Science
@lib_os · 1,027
1 post
Lomonosov Research - о поиске своего места в науке
@lomonosov_research · 78
1 post
Подосокорский
@podosokorsky · 29,673
1 post
Твой рагнарёк
@ragnarrrrrok · 25
1 post
RUDN.Sci
@RUDN_science · 988
1 post
Публикационная активность
@SPMU_Publications · 1,203
1 post
TSTU Scientific Publications | TDTU Ilmiy nashrlar
@tstupublication · 1,342
1 post
ВСЕВЕДА🕊
@VseWeda · 13,054
1 post
Ученый-Автор-Педагог
@yferf · 1,499
1 post

Names

Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.

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.

Научные конференции РИНЦ
@konferen · 34,071
Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 94 here — alongside 93 others — read 14 September 2026
Гуманитарные конференции
@confhum · 26,116
Telegram ranks this channel #15 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 14 September 2026
Русский research
@trueresearch · 26,517
Telegram ranks this channel #17 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 12 September 2026
Зоопарк из слоновой кости
@ivoryzoo · 32,006
Telegram ranks this channel #32 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 6 September 2026
Наука и университеты
@naukauniver · 43,162
Telegram ranks this channel #46 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 28 August 2026
Диссертация | Наталья Киреева | О научных статьях и диссертациях
@kireeva_science · 21,162
Telegram ranks this channel #78 of 96 here — alongside 95 others — read 25 September 2026

This channel appears in 6 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 4 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“Научные журналы и базы данных (НЖБД)” (@rujournals), 5,820 subscribers as measured 4 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/rujournals.

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.