# IMDb Top 250 TV(beta) List Released!

• Announcement
• Updated 5 years ago
Today we are happy to announce the release of the Top 250 TV (beta) list on IMDb!  Similar to the Top 250 Movies list, the Top 250 TV (beta) list ranks TV shows as rated by regular users.  Check out the list, vote on your favorites, and let us know what you think of the release.  The list can be seen here on your desktop:  http://www.imdb.com/chart/toptv , and under the 'TV' menu on IMDb apps and mobile browsers.

Thanks, and we hope you enjoy the new list!
• 3 Posts

Posted 5 years ago

• 18 Posts
Nice! The Wire is officially only fifth best. I know some people who are not going to be happy.
• 2 Posts
why has game of thrones 9,4 on the list when you go inn to it has it 9,5, the same with band of brothers
• 2 Posts
why has game of thrones 9,4 on the list when you go inn to it has it 9,5, the same with band of brothers

Dan Dassow, Champion

• 16721 Posts
Hi Erik Buodd,

http://www.imdb.com/chart/toptv?ref_=chttp_ttv_sm

At the bottom of the page, it states:

The Top 250 TV list only includes TV series and TV mini series.

• The list is ranked by a formula which includes the
number of ratings each show received from voters, and value of ratings
• To be included on the list, a series or mini series must
receive at least 5000 votes, and a TV series must also have aired at
least 5 episodes

The IMDb Top 250 TV (beta) uses the weighted average instead of the arithmetic mean. The weighted average is typically lower than the arithmetic mean.

• What does 'weighted average' mean?
A weighted average means that some votes have more weight than others in

• The average vote on film or show XYZ is wrong. Do you realize your math is way off?
The rating is correct -- please remember that the rating is weighted.
We do not simply calculate the average by adding up all the votes and

• But I made my own calculations and the rating for movie or show XYZ should be 7.7, not 4.3! What gives?
We do not disclose our rating/weighting scheme so you can't possibly
know what the weighted rating should be. Please remember that the rating
is weighted -- it's not the arithmetic mean value of the votes. To
prevent abuse and minimize attempts to stuff the ballot or otherwise
influence the integrity of the voting system, we do not, under any
circumstances, reveal any details about how weighted ratings are
assured that there is no bias involved. The same criteria are uniformly
used to calculate all the ratings for all the movies in the database.
• How do you calculate the rank of movies and TV shows on the Top 250 list?
The following formula is used to calculate the Top Rated 250 titles.
This formula provides a true 'Bayesian estimate', which takes into
required to be on the list, and the mean vote for all titles:

weighted rating (WR) = (v ÷ (v+m)) × R + (m ÷ (v+m)) × C

Where:

R = average for the movie (mean) = (Rating)
m = minimum votes required to be listed in the Top 250 (currently 25,000)
C = the mean vote across the whole report

Please be aware that the Top 250 movie list only includes theatrical
features: shorts, TV movies, miniseries and documentaries are not
included in the Top 250 movie chart. The Top 250 TV list includes TV
Series, but not TV episodes or Movies.
• 1 Post
This is obviously a work in progress; at this time (August 2015) it's way too heavily slanted towards more recent shows, and towards sci-fi. A year from now, when the fanatics have grown tired of voting for obscure shows with foreign titles, the cream will appear on the list and most of it will rise to the top.
• 19 Posts
@Jonathan Blees:

By my count, only 36 of the titles on the current list are sci-fi. About 10 of those have the sci-fi genre as a tag, but are borderline cases where the sci-fi is incidental/atypical (eg. Outlander, Life on Mars, Lost), or secondary to some other genres (eg. Invader Zim and Futurama are comedy/animations first and foremost; Person of Interest is an action/thriller). If you omit those, you're left with only about 10% of the list for which you can definitely say "yup, that's a sci-fi". I wouldn't call that too heavy of a slant.

Perhaps you didn't realize that things like Blue Planet, Frozen Planet and Through the Wormhole are nature/science documentaries?

As for the recency bias, I don't disagree with you that it exists. However, this is something that will not change significantly. TV is very different from movies; both in reality, where many people would argue we're currently going through a 'Golden Age' of high quality television; and as subsections on imdb itself, where the vast majority of older shows simply don't have the support to come anywhere near qualifying for this list, despite its lower vote threshold. Yes, some of the newer shows lower on the list will likely drop off the list as they accrue more votes, but they will most likely be replaced by even newer shows that come out down the road.

I do find certain parts of your comment a bit perplexing. The fact that you say the cream WILL appear implies that you think nothing on this list deserves to be there. I just wonder if you really think there are 250 shows that should supplant all of these. Probably not, but that's what your wording suggests. I also think you haven't realized that the cream ALREADY HAS risen to the top, and that this is very much a stable list already (especially the top half). Far from a work in progress.
• 211 Posts
Congratulations IMDB , but one thing: rise the minumum votes like Top250 Movies to 25000 not 5.000 like is now  . Please !!!

bluesmanSF, Champion

• 10815 Posts
James Hillman,

The Civil War does not have enough votes. The list calls for at least 5,000. But, it's close and will probably be there, at some point. It only needs 463 more votes.

bluesmanSF, Champion

• 10815 Posts
Ramuel,

With so many classic shows missing due to low total votes, I don't think it's likely to be raised...but you never know.
(Edited)
• 4 Posts
Then you would only have a list of the greatest TV shows/series of recent time. That would be a crap list.
• 269 Posts

"Then you would only have a list of the greatest TV shows/series of recent time. That would be a crap list."

It already is slightly like that (only consists of newer show), but at the same time some really obscure shows have sneaked into the mix, or ones with a small yet intense following.

Dan Dassow, Champion

• 16679 Posts
Increasing the minimum number of votes will not make the the IMDb Top 250 TV (beta) list better.

There are fundamental problems that will make it difficult to create a reasonable list based solely on simple filtering. The primary reason is that voting for any title on IMDb tends to be for more recent titles.

This is a problem with film titles, but that effect is mitigated by films being the main focus of IMDb. Over that the last 25 years older films have received exposure on IMDb and via classic film channels.

In contrast television shows are a relatively recent addition to IMDb, which magnifies the effect of voters focusing on newer television shows.

One way to adjust for newer television shows receiving larger number of votes is to use a sliding threshold for minimum number of votes by year. The downside to using a vote filter that depends upon year is that it makes the algorithm more complicated and potentially less robust.
• 4 Posts
It's a great initiative, but I think that you have to fix the way of the Japanese animation are chosen for the list. The same animation appears in the english and japanese versions. I believe that only one version should appears in the list.

bluesmanSF, Champion

• 10815 Posts
If you're sure that a title is listed in IMDb more than once, you can submit a request to merge the titles by going to "edit page" and correcting the less correct listing to be spelled the same as the more correct listing as described on How to merge two titles?

What you describe is not a flaw in the list but a situation where a title is listed more than once, as I understand from your post.
• 6 Posts
Dragon Ball shown in two entries. I can't be bothered to edit, please do it someone. I think English release is irrelevant and shouldn't be listed.
• 8 Posts
Yeah, I also find it strange that Dragon Ball Z has two entries, they should definitely be merged together. Only problem is how do you merge them?
• 458 Posts
"Originally airing in the United States in 1996, its initial run was heavily edited from the Japanese version, so much that out of the first 67 episodes, the American version was cut down to 53 episodes, 14 episodes worth of content. This was mostly due to the partnership between FUNimation productions (Who owned the rights) and Saban Entertainment (Who was responsible for distribution) When the show gained a following on Cartoon Network, it was renewed and FUNimation had sole control. As a result, the episodes were not as clipped as before, following the Japanese episode number precisely from then on."

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0214341/trivia?item=tr0647508
• 1 Post
I've been waiting for this. It would be great if you could sort the list by the amount of episodes every show has. So you conveniently could find out which series are short/long.
(Edited)

bluesmanSF, Champion

• 10815 Posts
Max,

That might be a good idea to suggest as an addition to "advanced title search." You might consider starting a suggestion or "idea" thread that other can vote in support of. It's kind of lost here in this thread and I don't know if "likes" triggers and flags to staff.
• 1455 Posts
Some users (who may be unfamiliar with the Top 250 lists) might complain about differences in ratings shown on the Top 250 TV page vs. the show pages.  (In one example, an 8.5 weighted average rating may appear on a show's page but the Top 250 page may show a different rating such as 8.3.)  I assume that this is because Top 250 pages use ratings from users that IMDb considers "regular voters" only.
(Edited)
• 1 Post
A few thoughts...I agree that the minimum votes should be raised to be the same as for the Top 250 Films which I believe is 35,000 (or 25,000?). Also, I think that documentary, reality, and variety series should be excluded from this list. Most of the top 10 series on the list right now are not even narrative projects. Anime shows are spilt on IMDB with an english dubbed version and the original subbed version. Anime films do not have this problem I believe. While I respect that with different voice actors the show may be a little different, I think that they should be combined into one title with one rating and then there be an option for a sub-rating based on which version you watched. I also think that anthology series (limited series) such as American Horror Story, True Detective, and Fargo should have sub-ratings as well for each season since they have a different story and different characters.
• 2 Posts
Seconded about anthology series. As well as subratings I think the main rating shown on the Top 250 page should be a weighted average of overall and season ratings.
• 19 Posts
Where does it say that all good TV has to be a "narrative project"? If a documentary, reality or variety series is highly viewed enough to make the top ten, then it belongs there. (and for reality/variety TV, do you really have to worry?) Honestly, before this discussion I didn't quite realize how many people seem to have an irrational dislike of documentaries.

The reason some anime shows have one listing for English and one for Japanese is NOT simply a matter of being 'a little different'. In some cases the American distributor did extensive editing and cutting of scenes. For example, sometimes several episodes would be cut down and condensed into one, and I believe sometimes entire episodes were just cut. Also, the order of some episodes would be jumbled around. The reality is, most anime shows on imdb are NOT split.

As for sub-ratings, it seems like you and the other people making this argument are starting to split hairs with your suggestions. Many shows have lots of character and/or creative team turnover, and this is exacerbated when the most popular shows tend to be the longest-running. Should The X-Files have a sub-rating for pre- and post- David Duchovny? What about Cheers with Coach-Woody, and Diane-Rebecca? What about The Simpsons, which many would argue has had at least three distinct 'eras' of writing? My view is, if it's produced under a single title, then it deserves a single listing. Quibbles about which season, story arc, or cast incarnation is best belong more on the discussion boards than as a feature built into the actual organization of the site.

Last of all, as I've touched on before in this thread, there aren't even 250 TV series TOTAL with 35,000 votes, and barely that with 25,000. Currently there are 204 that would qualify for the former, and 286 for the latter. Do you really want Full House, CSI: Miami, 2 Broke Girls, or The King of Queens as auto-inclusions on your 'Top TV' list? Don't forget that popularity and quality do not always go hand-in-hand.
• 1 Post
Maybe 5,000 minimum votes is slightly low but I don't think it should be as high as the Top 250 Films list because I'm sure many more people have rated films than TV shows (so far), plus there'll be some lesser known discoveries with little votes which users can now discover through this list.

I definitely agree that documentaries and reality shows should be omitted, like they are from the Films list (I think).

Dan Dassow, Champion

• 16721 Posts
The median (50th percentile), 90 percentile , 98th percentile number of votes would be a better indicator of what the threshold should be.
there are 43,914
Television titles listed on IMDb with at least 5 votes.

The 97th percentile is a typical threshold, so the current 5,000 vote minimum would be considered an appropriate threshold.
(Edited)

Dan Dassow, Champion

• 16721 Posts
RamuelSpirit,

Is 15,000 votes perfect because it gives you the results you want or because it is a statistically sound method for selecting television programs?

If it is because it gives you results you want, the approach cannot be considered a sound methodology that can continue to be used in the future. Others can rightfully argue that their selection of minimum votes and ratings threshold is equally valid.

The current threshold of 5,000 votes is a statistically defendable threshold based on the population of titles. A 15,000 vote and 8.0 rating minimum appears arbitrary and may not be defendable.

Consider also, that the titles in the advanced search you provide uses the average rating not the weighted rating from regular users for ranking. If IMDb uses 15,000 and 8.0 rating minimum the rankings may not be the same as what you show.
• 1455 Posts
... advanced search ... uses the average rating
not the weighted [?]  rating from regular users for ranking.
I may be confused but IIUC, the unweighted average is aka the Arithmetic Mean.  The Advanced Search ranking uses weighted ratings, albeit (as you say) from all users not just regular users.  Or am I wrong?
(Edited)

Dan Dassow, Champion

• 16721 Posts
Nobody, sorry for taking so long to respond. I believe that the Advance Search ranking uses the Arithmetic Mean not the weighted rating. I will do some benchmarks to verify whether my understanding in correct or mistaken.
• 1455 Posts
Dan, the following may support my belief that the
Advanced Title Search rankings use the (all-users) weighted ratings:

That search specifies ratings of 9.0 or above (sorted in ascending order).

At the time of this reply, the film listed in the first search result (TDK) has a weighted average rating of 9.0, but an Arithmetic Mean (unweighted average) of 8.9.  The film listed in the 2nd search result (The Godfather) has a weighted average rating of 9.2, but an Arithmetic Mean (unweighted average) of 8.9.

Since 8.9 is below the minimum rating value specified in the query,
I conclude that the search results appear to be ranked by the weighted ratings.

I could still be wrong  (and I am aware of some reasons why I could be wrong) ... but I think this evidence suggests that I'm right.  (-;
(Edited)
• 4 Posts
Ah, this is just too much...

Dibyayan Chakravorty, Champion

• 4657 Posts
This is awesome...now we can make some interesting polls using this list! Thank you!
• 3 Posts
Is it me or somehow tv shows 250 seems wrong?
probably because of 5k rating.
• 2 Posts
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled amazing idea....

There was something missing and you guys found it! 250 TV is genius...
• 1 Post
Where are ANGELS IN AMERICA-SHOGUN-THE SINGING DETECTIVE-LITTLE DORRITT  ?
• 11 Posts
Maybe, absolutely,  undoubtedly yes, and yes.  So how were those skipped??
• 1 Post
Did not know Band of Brothers was higher than Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones. Interesting. Might have to watch it now. I still consider Breaking Bad as the best series but I have yet to watch many others. I guess the list is okay, but Planet Earth above shows like Breaking Bad, GoT, the Wire, Sopranos, etc? Wow.
• 3 Posts
More popular doesnt mean better. It just means more people have watched it.
• 2 Posts
I also agree that the list is very flawed when shows that only lasted a few years 4 or fewer are ranked much higher then shows that lasted 11 or more years typically in TV if the shows aren't bringing in the ratings they get canceled so there is now way a show that only lasted 4 or fewer years was better or more popular then one that lasted 11 or more.  Like where is the Tonight Show with Johny Carson?
• 11 Posts
If we're going to give points for how long a show ran as a hit in ratings, where the hell is ER??  Or the original Law & Order?!  Or the original Upstairs, Downstairs??? And as for absolute cool, the original The Avengers with Patrick Macnee and the young and witty Diana Rigg should be up there (I guess nobody expects anyone over 40 to be voting on this list).  The respondent bias re: age is evident in that neither NYPD Blue nor Hill Street Blues made it into the list: they were BIG in the ratings while they were on, just like ER.  For that matter, if longevity on the air plus ratings were the only issues, a show my parents watched for 20 years, Gunsmoke, would be up there, too (I never liked it, but I was a toddler and I'm not really into Westerns, either).

Mind you, I was thrilled to see Homicide: Life on the Street listed as I love David Simon's work (I gave that a 10 and The Wire only an 8, because Homicide was groundbreaking in a way that The Wire wasn't), but I was very disappointed that Simon's recent series Treme didn't make it onto the list.

Also:  Looney Tunes, fine, love 'em, they're classic, but where's that subversive first version of Rocky the Flying Squirrel, aka Rocky and His Friends, with the hysterical Fractured Fairy Tales and Mr. Peabody and all the double- and triple-meaning jokes that only adults got? (DECADES ahead of the downmarket Simpsons!)  If Bugs was snarky, the writers for Moose & Squirrel were outright subversive!  Very happy to see Justified on the list (the world needs more Elmore Leonard), but not happy that Breaking Bad ranks so much higher than Justified.  I'll take laconic wit over boring drug thugs every time.  Sigh ... can't help but wonder how drastically this list would change if more women and more viewers over 40 responded.
(Edited)
• 2 Posts
I am just saying how can you say these shows that did not stand the test of time or for that matter really have a big following because it they did they would not have been canceled be included in a list that is supposed to be the top 250 tv shows of all time.  I agree to me it seems that it is just a bunch of fanboys in there twenties voting for what is popular now.  I sometimes think that the voting system has even been hacked.
• 10 Posts
You are right, or wrong, but in all fairness the "Planet Earth" should be ranked #1, and all others ranked at #2, as all the rest are but a small part of the Planet. In fact it should be ranked number #1 based on merit alone.

The IMDb made a couple of errors in it's listing, the weekly series had 14 Episodes not 11, and the DVD Cover that accompanies the listing is Discover Channel's when clearly it was produced by the BBC. David Attenborough would be turning over in his grave right now if he had passed away, but he is happily still alive and kicking.

• 4 Posts
Finally, was waiting for this. How do I get to know "under construction" features like this. THis is beta version right? I would like to know what else you are thinking of including.

anyway, loving this. Seifneld is 36 :( and GoT is 4 :((  anyway, Wire it up there. :) niCE!
• 1455 Posts
There will probably be some controversy about how "revival" series are listed separate from original series.

Just for example, the 12-episode limited revival series "24: Live Another Day"  (currently #156 in the list) is listed separate from the original 8-season "24"  series (currently #202 in the list).

Other "revival" series will likewise take separate positions in the list.  For example, the upcoming revival of "The X Files"  will be listed separate from the original series.

Some users have suggested that some "revival" and original series title pages should be combined.  (I'm not here to argue for or against that.)  Up to now, IMDb has decided to keep some revival series title pages separate from the originals.

Some users have said they would like to be able to rate individual seasons.  If that capability were eventually implemented, then it would be possible to create a "Top 250 TV Seasons" list (if some users would be interested in that).

(Disclaimer:  I personally don't care about any of this.  For my purposes, I don't see much value, if any, in ratings and rankings.  But that is just me.  I'm not here to push my personal views, at least not in this thread.)
(Edited)
• 6 Posts
I really, really believe revivals should listed combined, I have my own sheet of tv shows and I list 24 as one. I can't bear to see two seperate entries. It is ridiculous. And it is not standardized anyway, why is Arrested Development listed combined and not 24 and others? Such a disappointment.
• 4 Posts
what about the the 3 revivals of Twilight Zone. Should they be merge even though they take place 3 decades apart. Where do you draw the line? Really just asking to add to your point. Its a tough one to sort out.
• 3 Posts
Absolutly disagree, a revival is still advertised as something new, which is why it is called 24:live another day and not simply 24. Its something entirely new while still part of the same universe which is why it wasnt merged with the old series in the first place
• 1 Post
Breaking Bad should be the first there's no better series
• 2 Posts
Have you seen the other two?
• 1 Post
i saw band of brothers too
(Edited)
• 2 Posts
Game of throne is way more complex than Breaking bad, only for that, GOT should be ahead
• 4 Posts
Yeah, but GOT is so misogynistic, it should be behind (bad choice of words)
• 11 Posts
Sorry, boys: Breaking Bad is for the testosterone poisoned (yes, there are more of those viewers out there than there are intellectuals or lovers of history, but still: nobody who thinks BB is 'the best show on TV ever' should be allowed to reproduce). I'm glad Band of Brothers made it to the top and thrilled that both versions of Cosmos are in the top 10. YESSSSSSSSS!  (bonus points for you, Carl Sagan, wherever you are)  Also surprised that From The Earth To The Moon only made it to 52, but at least it's in the top 60.  Absolutely shocked, however, that Upstairs, Downstairs didn't make the list at all.  What, nobody over 40 voting??!? (besides me, that is)  If you think the to-do over Downton Abbey is big, you've completely forgotten (or never knew because you weren't born yet) what Sunday nights were like when folks all watched Upstairs, Downstairs on PBS and then talked about it the next day -- it was a phenomenon.  Geez, I'm glad the rest of the world doesn't revolve exclusively around 16-to-29-year-old males.
(Edited)
• 211 Posts
For me this Top250 Tv is so useless with 5.000 mimunum votes, i prefer insted this search :
An ideea insted this better make a GOOD Top100 or something with minumum 25000 becouse this Top which is Beta is a joke .  Just me humble opinion .
(Edited)
• 4 Posts
i agree, i think it should even be more then 25000
• 11 Posts
Yeah, well, there's a problem with that:  the majority of IMDb users don't accurately represent the majority of TV viewers, and there just might be a real difference of opinion there ... and asking for 25K votes or more biases the voting in favor of a distinctly younger, more male respondent group because that's the group most likely to use and comment on IMDb.  Limiting the voting to only 5K reduces that bias somewhat, though it doesn't eliminate it (anyone who's ever done survey research can tell you that much). And I haven't even begun to discuss how to compensate for the fact that female users of IMDb are less likely to bother to comment on IMDb lists (perhaps they're dodging trolls?) -- if such an adjustment can even be made at all.
• 2 Posts
Where is -The Americans ? I can not understand how the best spy series ever ,With a great actors , and writers in John le Carré caliber .Are Not in the list and did not get any important awards . It's a mystery ...
(Edited)
• 11 Posts
Oh, it's a good show; but le Carre caliber?  Nope, sorry, you must never have seen the original Tinker Tailor Solider Spy on PBS or the rest of the George Smiley series, which really ought to be on this list ahead of a lot of other stuff (like The Simpsons). But perhaps those shows ran before you were born ... which would explain much.
• 2 Posts
I'm not so young . 55. I saw the Tinker Tailor Solider Spy and it is really great , I also remember the wonderful series Callan with Edward Woodward ,These are fabulous British series . Like other series - The Singing Detective ,  Pennies From Heaven , works of Dennis Potter (I have not checked  but if they are not in the list it's a scandal).I believe the Americans is approaching the BBC level,the details , periodic Restoration, the level of the actors , the level of writing , approaching the level of British series of the golden age of the BBC . But you're right , Those series were brilliant , and they must be at the top of the list
(Edited)
• 2 Posts
It seems like people are giving Planet Earth 1-Star ratings so their favourite shows get to second or first place (mostly Breaking Bad and GoT I suspect).
According to another user, Planet Earth had around 1k 1-Star ratings before the Top 250 went live and now it has over 9k.
• 8 Posts
This could be avoided if we could have separate categories (Documentary, Fictional, non-Fiction).
• 19 Posts

This is one of my major concerns about having a top 250 TV list. One of the ongoing problems with having a top 250 is the jockeying of votes at both the very top and the bottom / fringe of the bottom. It encourages massive amounts of downvoting in an effort to game the system. And if the numbers you quote are accurate (thousands of 1's in less than a week?), then is even more worrisome than I thought.

I hope that the imdb team applies some of the lessons they've learned about how these rankings affect voting patterns to this new list. Even a weighted average system can eventually be biased by this kind of behaviour.

Yet despite all that, I still don't think we should be fragmenting this list into various genres or other categories. That sort of separation can be done very easily with Advanced Title Search.

• 2 Posts
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Best 250 TV shows chose Conan and no Letterman, really!.

How Conan made it to this list and Letterman didn't, is a mystery to me.
• 1 Post
Great idea, was about time IMDb paid tribute to the growing popularity and relevance of TV shows.

I have some criticism as well though. I don't think the inclusion of documentary series (like "Planet Earth" or "The World at War") and late night shows (like "Late Night with Conan O'Brian") mixes well with the major bulk of fictional series. It's really irritating, so I think omiting these would be beneficial for the consistency and locig of that list.
(Edited)
• 10 Posts
You are right, or wrong, but in all fairness the "Planet Earth" should be ranked #1, and all others ranked at #2, as all the rest are but a small part of the Planet. In fact it should be ranked number #1 based on merit alone.
• 19 Posts

IMO, it mixes fine. TV is not like cinema in that a much larger percentage of what is watched is NOT fictional. Yes, various comedies and dramas are still the majority of what you see, but there's plenty of documentaries, news series, talk shows, game shows, and yes, even reality TV. Omitting any of that would be wrong.

However, you can probably take comfort in the fact that most of these nonfictional formats either A) don't come anywhere NEAR getting 5000 votes on imdb, and/or B) don't get rated very highly at all. After a quick glance at the current list, there seem to be no more than 2 or 3 dozen nonfictional shows. That ratio on a list of 250 is much lower than the actual ratio you will find on TV by flipping channels.

If you want to see a list catered to what you want, you can exclude genres with a search like this: http://www.imdb.com/search/title?!genres=documentary&num_votes=5000,&sort=user_rating,desc&a...

• 1 Post
why is the nostalgia critic and angry video game nerd there? those are not tv shows and shouldnt be on the list, also the only people who voted over a 5 on those pages are retarded pedophiles cause those guys aint the slightest bit funny and their so called shows kinda sucks
• 8 Posts
I was waiting for this for a long time, thanks.
However, it's not what I expected, I would have loved the list to be split into a few categories like Documentary, non-Fiction and Fictional shows and maybe Animation too. To have it all mixed together makes no sense to me.
• 1 Post
Lost is 188th, with this result I can't trust this list anymoore. And TV series is not like a movies, there are a lot of country takes good TV series for their countries. To choose best one first you need to add the other TV series to list.
• 1455 Posts