::Well, those are pretty good, solid arguments. I propose an open poll. 
 ::Now, I don't necessarily object your reasoning or your proposal, Dunadan, I only feel that the case of Monterrey is, in fact, unique in Mexico. As I said before, this isn't like Barcelona, that gained a metropolitan area through connurbation. Monterrey gained a metropolitan area through design and government policies that encouraged the integration of the municipalities, since very early in its history. Additionally, and contrary to what happens with the metro areas of most other cities in Mexico (except, perhaps, Guadalajara and Mexico City), the metro area of Monterrey is almost 50 years old. It isn't as recent a phenomenon as that of other cities... 
 ::I repeat to you, Monterrey is given by the State of Nuevo León a "de facto" treatment of a single entity in many official issues. This is something I have yet to see in, for instance, the Metropolitan area of Mexico City, or Torreon, (though, of course, in those cases the issue is more complex because the metro area trascends state boundaries)... 
 ::So yes, the "official definition" of CONAPO and INEGI is one, but the "official treatment" of the State of Nuevo León does not necessarily match. It would be equally misinformant to the reader to not let them see this.  
 ::We are still at an impasse. We can make this article about the municipality and talk about the municipality's relationship to the metro area and the legal priviliges the State gives it, or we can make this article about the metro area and talk about the official definitions of INEGI and CONAPO and how they are not 100% according to the official behavior of the State of Nuevo León. 
 ::So, I propose an open poll and let all editors decide. As for me, I don't specifically oppose your proposal if it were chosen, but I would prefer my proposal for the above reasons. 
 ::In any case, part of the proposal is to avoid redundancies. Whatever the topic of this article, if it mirrors that of another article, the other article must either be erased, or have it redirect here. 
 ::