Potential for abuse and the neutral point of view.
My largest issue with this proposition is that it might quickly me misused to violate the neutral point of view championed by the 5 (five) pillars of the Wikimedia Foundation, a tool such as this would easily attract trolls who want to promote their position in the government or use it as an elective tool 🔬 to showcase their own achievements and downplay others. Which further brings me to the question, what is “good”? Because that is subjective, I would argue that digging a well is a good thing, while someone from an area of the same country where water 💦 is plentiful would argue that his/her tax-money 💴 should've better been spent on vaccines. Some would say that a government that spends a lot on social welfare is “good” while others would say that allowing private companies to do that instead of using government money 💴 is “good”. The problem too is that a lot of charities already love to troll Wikipedia by promoting their non-notable good work 🏢. I just see so many ways how this can be abused and it's very well familiar that politicians love to troll the internet by inserting exclusively good information 🛈 about themselves while removing any criticisms, this project could easily be misused as a propaganda trolling tool.