Out of all problems with this list, dark souls being on #1 is the least for me. It is a dungeon crawler, it is just as much an rpg as wizardry 1-5 or ultima underworld. So enlighten me, what exactly makes you disregard dark souls as an rpg?
Out of the problems with your post these two are the biggest for me: 1) DS is not a dungeon crawler, it's an ARPG and there's a lot more action than RPG in it and 2) DS may be a solid game but it's nowhere near the best ARPG of all times (no matter what console kiddies may believe).
1) Arpg determines the form of combat, not the actual subgenre. There are turnbased dungeon crawlers, rtwp dungeoncrawlers and Arpg dungeoncrawlers.
Dungeoncrawl is simply a term to describe the enviroment the game takes place in, which is usually maze like areas filled with combat encounters, traps, puzzles and loot, while lacking plot, friendly npcs or civilized settlements.
2) I see you want to argue taste now, alright. Aside from maybe Gothic1+2 there is no contest for Dark Souls on the market, no matter what some pc masterrace neckbeards tend to believe. Its combat system blows everything else out of the water, atmosphere, encounter- and leveldesign are superb, character progression is actually pretty interesting.
Yes there are some old Arpgs that are important to the genre and all and actually hold up pretty well, but you seriously cant argue that the combat in ultima underworld for example is up to par with DS.
Gentle Player: While that is true, those lvl1 runs are mostly achieved by extreme cheesing and skipping content. I wouldnt count that as a valid reason to question the games genre.
I dont say Dark Souls really deserves the spot, as for me personally i dont consider dungeoncrawls important enough to take that spot. But as an actual dungeoncrawls Dark Souls is undisputedly a fucking gem.