Yes, it looks like a good article. I won’t comment on the validity of the hypothesis that Florio edited the First Folio. That’s beyond my expertise and really requires someone who is immersed in the editorial history of Shakespeare’s plays.
Yes, the reporter has mucked up the quotations, but it’s not entirely his fault. Shakespeare’s works are almost always presented with modern spelling and form. The text as it appears in the folio (and it’s almost always the folio text that is used) rarely is given. The reporter seems to have gotten confused regarding the editions, an easy thing to do.
For instance, ”good my lord, for my ease” (Hamlet, 5.2.105) is what appears in my copy of The Riverside Shakespeare, or more completely, “Nay, good my lord, for my ease, in good faith.”
You have to go to the textual apparatus at the end of the play to see what the folio actually reads which is, “Nay, in good faith, for my ease in good faith.”
This part of the exchange doesn’t appear in either of the Hamlet quartos that I can tell. I don’t know what the basis is for Riverside’s emendation of this line.
(For reference, the exchange in Florio’s Second Fruits is on page 111. EEBO doesn’t have full text search for this work, so it’s hard to find.)