so many exhibits all over the world have themed exhibits that are plastic, tacky and horrible ..... (Disney Animal Kingdom definitely over-themes .....). A perfect example is DAK's Tiger habitat, where the "ruined temple" theme is so prevalent that the Tigers get a fairly poor habitat.
I am of the mindset that people come to zoos to see animals, not to see money and space wasted on "African Villages" and "Mayan Ruins".
Are you seriously saying that zoos should have an emphasis of entertainment over education!
World class for entertainment DAK may be, but a world class zoo it is not.
I hope that my alternate views on this subject have not been insulting to anyone. I think my differing views come from the fact that I am a guidebook author, I write guidebooks (about zoos) for travelers who are likely not big fans of zoos, like most ZooChat members. The readers of my books are usually lovers of animals, usually young families with children, and are often very loyal supporters of their own local zoo. But most of my readers, when first buying my book, do not venture out and visit other zoos, as they feel going to their own local zoo is good enough -- and they tend to think "all zoos are the same" (or mostly the same). That is the goal of my books, to convince these folks that zoos are often quite different, and it is truly worth a day or two of their vacation/holiday to actually visit an out-of-town zoo. What I often say is that I'm trying to convince that family driving on the interstate/expressway that a zoo would be worth them pulling off the highway and spending some vacation time there. This is the reason I'm looking for something different, or even unique. This is why I'm a huge fan of Disney's Animal Kingdom -- it's an entirely unique experience, and sorry TZDugong, but I think DAK's exhibits are near-perfect.
But I understand that most of you here on ZooChat are not guidebook authors. Your criteria for rating zoos is thus different. You are rating based on what's good for what SnowLeopard calls a "zoo nerd" -- one who has likely already visited 50-100 or more zoos in their lifetime. To such a person, I fully understand that rides and special attractions are distractions from what you really want to see, which is primarily the animals. I understand that.
With all of the above being said, I still think your competition needs Kolmarden! Without it, you are ignoring Sweden, which quite honestly has Scandinavia's best zoo.
As for your final question, DZDugong, I am a fan of Walt Disney's famous quote, "
I would rather entertain and hope that people learned something than educate people and hope they were entertained." Disney understood the basic economics that if you don't entertain people, they will not likely return -- and not likely continue to contribute to the zoo's finances. But if you do entertain them, you can then also educate them. Education doesn't have to be obvious, it can be subtle.
) just doesn't belong in a zoo for me (eventhough I like rollercoasters). 
the nocturnal house and the small museum of preserved specimens were two other highlights!
