This is a good question, and I think there are several things to consider.
Straightaway, you should keep in mind that phrases like “the majority of scholars” or “many scholars”—which are encountered everywhere in Biblical scholarship—would be rejected even by Wikipedia as weasel words.
Next, as the commenter observes, everything can be questioned; and given that academics need publications and presentations in order to be employed, everything surely has been questioned by now. (See the Wikipedia article on the authorship of the Pauline epistles—even the “Undisputed epistles” are disputed; they give citations!)
But the final thing to ask is what kinds of arguments can be constructed either way. What does it mean, for instance, to dispute the authorship of Jude? There is nothing to compare it to; the same goes for Matthew and Mark, for example.
The name “Paul” has more books associated with it, and Paul is prominent in Acts, and is mentioned in 2 Peter 3:16. But even then, one can only ask whether the fourteen letters bearing Paul's name were written by the same person or different people. Perhaps I believe that the Pauline epistles were written by two different people. But I can never know which person had the Damascus Road experience. (Wikipedia lists Ephesians as disputed, but perhaps Ephesians is the only letter actually written by Paul, and all the others are forgeries. It's just not possible to argue one way or the other.)
A final note is that it's very difficult to make a convincing argument about authorship. Here is a passage from Richard Hays's The Moral Vision of the New Testament:
New Testament scholars are sometimes oddly resistant to the idea that
Paul could have developed or even declined as a theological thinker.
When the topic of pseudonymous composition arises, I like to ask my
students whether all those albums issued under the name of Bob Dylan
for the last fifteen years can possibly be the work of the same person
who performed “Highway 61 Revisited.