I...think this is grammatically correct, though. ^^; It's just informal in a sort of antiquated way...people don't really use 'good' in certain phrases anymore, but it doesn't make it wrong.
Like, if you break it down: "she speaks English" is grammatically correct. So adding an adjective to 'English' shouldn't break the sentence. "She speaks British English", for example, is fine. So "She speaks good English" should also be technically fine.
It feels like 'good' inherently describes the way 'she' speaks, which makes it feel wrong; because you're supposed to say that as "she speaks well". But 'good' is actually the qualifier of 'English', as in 'good English'. To give another example, "she bakes good bread" is also fine.
Maybe someday 'good' will fall further out of favor, and a sentence like that will break convention so hard you could make a case that it's grammatically incorrect. But I don't think we're there just yet.
This is actually a really interesting distinction...so if the way the writer describes the subjects of the story and the situations in the story isn't the 'story itself'...what IS the story itself??
All that's left outside of the telling would be the vague idea behind it...and I think the claim 'there's no such thing as a bad story idea' might actually have some merit. Like, when I say 'anything can work if you make it work'; that's basically the same thing, right?