Talk:Prime Minister parodies (Private Eye)

Merging (general discussion)
I'm starting this on Talk:Private Eye, to generate more discussion. Jdcooper (talk) 19:14, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm totally baffled by the comment above this piece that says it relies too much on primary sources and that secondary or tertiary sources are better. In other words - the writer or writers of the piece are telling us what was in Private Eye based on their experience of actually reading Private Eye. But that's not good enough, we are told. Wikipedia says it would be better if they didn't read Private Eye themselves, but instead relied on the comments of people commenting on the comments of people who had read Private Eye. Call me old fashioned, but I think primary sources are sometimes the best. Andy Lewis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.248.46 (talk) 20:29, 28 May 2015 (UTC)