Gregory Maxwell wrote:
Often, sure— But what happens when it fails and you have someone yelling loudly on the talk page "Hey! it's misattributing my authorship to some dumb bot, yet I wrote the whole thing!" ...
It's not reasonable by any human (or legal) standard to continue to misattribute in a case like that, yet addressing that case with some automatically generated report is not easy.
There could be an override for some articles for outsiders, just to stop misattribution in the time being, but it can't be treated as a solution. If it attricutes a bot, the algorith is wrong and shall be fixed. Add it to the tests and improve the algorithm. One very important point of having an automated way of dealing with this is precisely that it allows us to be completely neutral. The "author reviewer" doesn't have a POV, it doesn't care that the contributor is named "Willy on wheels" or "Gmaxwell".
The hard part is obviously how to get that magic attribution tool. If at least there would have been some convention on summary syntax to be used when attributing someone else...