It seems there are only 2 ways: you give up and withdraw, or you get inscribed. Nothing in between anymore. Seeing the WHC behave over the past days, I am afraid that the whole bunch will be inscribed as they symphatize with other countries and don't listen much to the AB's.
It fits with the direction the Committee has been on in the past years.
And to a certain extent, I have some sympathy for them (I know, this is an unpopular opinion). The creation of dossiers for nominations has become more and more complex, more expensive too! (Just check the recent ones vs the ones from the 90s). The Advisory Bodies have more and more things to moan about - compare with Selous's inscription in 1982, when IUCN was fine with a dam being built in the core area! State Parties are not willing to see all their money going down the drain - or even worse, having to create a new dossier following a Deferral or Referral.
In addition, the current stringency of the Advisory Bodies affects in particular poorer countries, who don't have the resources to create fancy dossiers that address any possible criticism by ABs. No wonder they have particularly little regard for the ABs recommendations - anything the ABs demand means higher costs for them. As an additional consequence of this, we see less and less nominations by poorer countries, while rich countries such as Germany manage to produce acceptable dossiers on an industrial scale. In the early days, Ethiopia could inscribe half a dozen sites with little problems; now, it's much harder.