You might also wonder if the transcript is an observation or a story of personal experience. It's kind of both.
Retelling your observation of an event in which you were a participant is necessarily a story of your own experience.
For example, we called Pliny's letter about the eruption of Mt Vesuvius a personal story, but it could also be called observational evidence.
The takeaway here is that some pieces of evidence can fit multiple categories, and that's fine.
The point of these categories is not to play matching games; it's to help you identify the inherent strengths & weaknesses of a piece of evidence.
For example, a problem with personal stories as evidence is we often have to take the speaker's word for it. Pliny's evidence is more like a personal story because we can no longer see what he observed; whereas we can immediately see for ourselves what FranklyGaming observed.
But that's not to say all observations can be repeated!
There's a lot of observational evidence where, if we are going to believe it, we just have to take the observer's word about what they observed.
(Also, observations about games are ambiguous because we experience them. Descriptions of events in books or movies don't blur into personal experience as much because the line between the observer and the action is more defined.)