Before i posted this discussion, I asked myself, am I ready for Bdell555's next move, which will be to pretend that the consensus of the editors is not against him, thus requiring me to itemized all the objections?
The issue is, is the article improved by changing the sentence to either of the two versions you have championed, one which shifts it against Hiss, saying "New evidence has added a variety of information supporting Hiss' guilt" or one which states that "most" scholars have concluded Hiss guilty.
One the former, you were specifically criticized by DCGeist and Cberlet.
One the latter, a version of which you are trying to introduce now, KarlBunker came out against it, saying, "it essentially declares one side of a debate to be the "winner," and.... It's best for Wikipedia to avoid "declaring a winner" like this unless there's a very clear consensus among scholars."
John Z has also specifically criticized you on this change, saying that your version doesn't addresses the concerns of other editors.
So, since I don't think we need to debate RedSpruce's position, we still come up with the same score:
Number of editors who have commented here favoring changing the sentence to either state that new evidence supports Hiss' guilt and/or that most scholars believe him guilty: SIX.
Number of editors who have commented endorsing the change: JUST YOU.
Please stop violating consensus.