At the end of the day the player does not get to choose the role or combination of roles of his playable character(s) when playing a Legend of Zelda game, and therefore it is not at its core an RPG. Of course it has similar combat to action-RPG's both derive that from the action genre, not the RPG genre. All games have money. Is Grand Theft Auto an RPG because it has money, shops, and you can do missions (quests), you have gear, and the story is told at a relatively slow pace? What video game does not have NPC's or explorable areas? Why would gear qualify a game as an RPG? Purely action games like Call of Duty have leveling elements and gear, while Role-Playing Games like Pokemon do not have gear, or at least not to the same extent. 

If we look at the history of the RPG genre, the only common element they share is that you choose the path or combination of paths that your characters take in their development. Some Role-Playing games do this by having you combine their party members who have different trait (Pokemon) other do this by allowing you to level up skills or choose stats (Elder Scrolls), and many also do this by allowing you to choose a class (World of Warcraft.) 

This is a issue due to the way the language referring to genres have changed over the years.

I remember back during ALTTP's release where all the magazines referred to it as an Action RPG. At some point the idea of an RPG became more refined and people now expect leveling up or an equivalent mechanism to be central to the gameplay experience of an RPG. Zelda achieves that to some degree with items but many don't feel Zeldas items are enough to justify that label (Or most games these days would fit into the RPG genre).

There's little doubt, regardless what you choose to call them, that the old Zeldas were inspired by the RPG's of the time.

BTW now a days all games have RPG elements. So debate is kinda pointless. At end end of the day this is a great game series.

No.
From the sounds of it Skyward Sword incorporated more RPG elements but Zelda is still an Adventure game:

Exploration, reflex based Action, Puzzle Solving and Discovery. There is no emphasise on non scripted character development, customization, leveling or stats.

Well, you can't choose your role, class or customize your character in the majority of rpg's. In some, you only have a solo playable character and in others, you'll get a party in which you can choose the party make up. A lot of genres use rpg elements like the ones you mentioned. You're saying that some of these elements are in a lot of games but they're not rpg's? That is what I'm talking about. Those are the borrowed elements. COD. Strip it of all it's rpg elements and you can only pick a class loadout/guns then go shoot somebody. No skins, customization with soldier gear or guns. No leveling up. No perks or bonuses. Any sense of progression. The very things you're using as examples as to why zelda is not a rpg is the very reason it's a rpg. You're just pointing out rpg elements.

I'm not looking at it just at this point in video games and rpg's but from back then til now. Shops, using money, gear, customization, character creation, levels, stats, grinding, exploring world maps or wide areas, items, ect... It's all from rpg's. It doesn't matter which of today's games has those things in 'em because it's all from rpg's.

Take a look at NES games to prove my point. Did Battletoad have levels, shops, towns? How about Contra? Maybe Super Mario Bros? Perhaps megaman? Dragon Warrior, Final Fantasy, Faxanadu seem to have some of that in 'em. 

Zelda has enough rpg elements to tip the balance over to it being a type of rpg. The only thing it's really missing is a sort of leveling system but many rpgs are very different from each other in some sense. If you compare the leveling system from skyrim and compared it to morrowind, skyrim's version is kinda of a token level system. They could take it out at that point. 

You customize your party though by choosing characters. The role of your party changes. For example, in Xenoblade even if we ignore the choice of our skills, a Reyn (Tank) - Sharla (Healer) - Melia (Mage) party is very different from a Shulk - Melia - Seven knockdown party. In almost every RPG with a solo character you are able to choose which skills you want to play with the most. Can you provide an example of an RPG where the character is restricted to unchosen skills with no management on the players behalf and there is only one single playeable character? 

I pointed out rpg elements in other games because you used the presence of a few of said elements in LoZ as a substantiation for labeling LoZ as an RPG. That is all, no more no less. You said that because LoZ has all of these elements it is an RPG. However, GTA has vastly more RPG elements than LoZ, and still isn't considered an RPG, for example. I also criticized your  labeling of towns, gear, and money/shops as RPG elements. They are not. 

What LoZ is missing is a choice in how your character plays. That is why it is not an RPG. You can't make Link not use archery, or magic, or sword-play. You have to use these elements in order to progress in the game. In a Role-playing game you always have choice in how your characters skills develop, in LoZ you do not. 

Go look at NES rpg games versus other NES games. Just please. Those elements came from rpg's but since it's been used so much in other genres, people have gotten confused over time or they are just young enough to not be aware of where those elements came from.  

Action Adventure

You say this as if the NES was the first generation of video games or that it is the only platform in existence then. But I'll humor you.

In Kid Icarus (Genre: Action-Platformer) you could trade hearts for items from the gods, you have gear in the form of Arrow of Strength, Fire Arrow, Protective Crystal, and Sacred Bow.  Like the original Legend of Zelda, there are no towns, but there are specific areas where you interact with NPC's such as: hospitals, stores, and sacred chambers.