Can I remove data verification communications from my contact history that have been dealt with?

2 are pending updates on related news articles (5 days and 1 day old),

Both of which are now officially backlogged:

This is just a note to let you know that although it's almost been
48 hours since you sent in your message, we haven't forgotten about
you!

We strive to answer all questions within 48 hours, but due to the large number
of questions we have right now we're afraid we may have
to go over a bit this time. :(

Please hang in there and we'll be getting back to you as quickly
as we possibly can!

Our apologies again, and we appreciate your understanding.

There are more related news articles that need updating, but this and the data verification contacts have me rather locked out.

I still have two outstanding changes to related news (submitted 30th Oct and 3rd Nov) and 6 data verifications messages all of which have now been dealt with.

I can no longer report spam (I tried t report one of the spam lists the other day and got redirected to the error page), but also have half a dozen plus related news changes to submit but that is all bottlenecked at the moment.

I can see the need to restrict the number of general messages sent to the helpdesk to prevent people flooding them with "why haven't you accepted the submission I made 5 minutes ago?" messages but it seems odd to add data verification contacts to this list without removing them after they're no longer needed or even changes to related news (as there are sometimes half a dozen or more related news items that need updating when a title is eventually added to IMDB - I currently have 8 open in tabs as reminders I need to get them updated when I can).

Try again -- you should be fine. I think all the pending msgs. you had have been actioned.

Also, far be it from me to discourage you from submitting information, but you might find more efficient to use the data evidence only in cases where data is actually being rejected or not being accepted without proof. I seem to understand that several of those messages (apart from the newsdesk corrections) were pointing to supplementary evidence.

Don't get me wrong, it's great to receive additional context/evidence in support of a pending submission, but that form may not be the best way to do it as it goes through a different channel than the data, and in several cases you the data may have already been processed/approved by the time we get to look at the additional context.

I would recommend that you use that form only for cases where there is actually need for additional data in order to get the submission accepted (and only for data that can't be shared publicly -- if you want to provide evidence of onscreen credits like screen grab or youtube videos, or links to news articles, they can be posted here on GS).

Thanks.

Cheers - points taken on board (it was the way my mind was going following this).