As far as I know, Juan Maldacena's paper is what what finally convicted Stephen Hawking that he was wrong. Then "black hole complementarity" argument become go

As far as I know, Juan Maldacena's paper is what what finally convicted Stephen Hawking that he was wrong. Then "black hole complementarity" argument become good enough to explain back hole paradox. Then it came Joe Polchinski with his AMPS paper which proved that "complimentary black hole" is wrong. Now we are in square one - and it could be Hawking is right. (I have only basic physic knowledge so I would appreciate if somebody with more education can describe this).