Primary, Secondary, Or Tertiary?

Transcripts and recordings of interviews are primary sources. They're as close to first-hand as you can get.

Magazine articles like this are usually secondary sources.

In science and social science research, the raw data is a primary source.

Science and social science datasets are often found on the web, put there by the researchers or the institutions that sponsor them.

Newspapers and other documents from the era you are studying are primary sources.

Encyclopedias, as well as dictionaries, handbooks, manuals, guides, and many other kinds of reference sources, are tertiary sources. This is because they bring together the information discovered and interpreted by many scholars.

Most documentaries are secondary resources because they interpret and explain the primary sources (documents... documentaries... !)

Non-fiction books, whether scholarly or non-scholarly, are almost always secondary sources. The only exceptions are when they are reference books (tertiary sources) or from a time period that you are studying (so you are using them as primary sources.)

Scholarly articles are secondary sources. They interpret the information found in primary sources.

When you are studying literature, the work you are studying is the primary source. When you are studying history and culture, a piece of literature (or other artform) from that time, place, and culture might be used as a primary source too.

All the options are correct, except for scholarly. Primary sources are not divided into scholarly versus non-scholarly, because they are used as evidence of how something happened, just as fingerprints are evidence at a crime scene regardless of the expertise or reputation of the person who left them!