before i posted this discussion i asked myself am i ready for bdell '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