too many people, MOST people actually, are horrifically wrong in their belief that it's the suject matter or the amount of words or what words are used that defines the quality of lyrics. this is quite a hole-filled, ham-fisted, childish process of appreciation.
how "good" lyrics are has nothing to do with what they're about. well, it's like 10% what they're about, only in that if a really terrible lyricist bases their lyrics off of a really good movie, the overall product might still be tolerable.
"good" lyrics are, IMHO, about two things:
1. tell me something or tell me nothing. or both. just make up your mind.
i can't stand lyrics that try to sound like they're discussing something really deep but in OBVIOUS reality aren't about anything interesting in particular because there's just not enough, as Tom Waits would put it, "real junk", proper nouns and the like, to make me believe it's based off of something i or anyone else should care about.
the "good"ness of lyrics, and of music (and art) in general, can only really be judged by the standard of "does it accomplish what it sets out to do? if yes, it's good, if no, not." how good something is is based on how lofty or refined of a goal they've set. if you set out to make girlpop, then at it's best the product couldn't be as "good" as, say, a well-executed improvisational jazz record, unless, of course it's more well-executed.
so, if you're trying to tell something deep, i better get the message. if you're trying to say something deep but you don't care if anyone gets the point, but i can figure out what the point is anyway because it's not actually deep at all, it fails. if you're trying to say something simple and obvious and your own pretentious shit gets in the way of the message, you fail. if your lyrics aren't about anything but we're supposed to believe that they're about something, but it's obvious that they're not, you fail.
2. good rhyming or no rhyming.
if i see a rhyme coming, all of them, over and over, it fails. unless the point is for the stuff in between the rhymes to be good, and for the rhymes to be simple to facilitate that. in which case the stuff in between better be real good. if i am not, at least once, impressed by an unusual rhyme or phrase, if every "rhyme" is an actual rhyme, like how "bone" and "cone" rhyme as opposed to making "usual" and "refusal" or "resting" and "blessing" rhyme somehow, you generally FAIL. the rhymes better justify their own existance by being good. or they don't need to be there.
these aren't absolutes nor my complete list of criteria. but those are the two general rules that apply to all styles, excepting those styles that specifically, conciously oppose them.