The damage is already done. "I'm sorry (but I was still right!)" is the kind of apology I would expect to hear from a child. If you're sorry, then make it right and undo the harm that you did. Otherwise, just shut-up, you're not sincere.
The solution to a wiki page being marked AfD is to improve the article with useful citations or discuss why the current citations are enough to verify the article.
It's not to stalk both online and offline the person who suggested a discussion should be had on the notability of a topic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_(programming_language) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nemerle
I might just be seeing a cached version, though.
edit: grr, I cannot reply to you, but yes, that was my point exactly: he could request a deletion review.
What exactly do you want from him then?
A sincere apology would involve 1) apologizing/admitting wrong-doing and 2) undoing the damage. I could certainly settle for only the second.
Honestly this sounds like 2 things - A cry of help from Wikipedia stating they need concerted outside help/force to fix something they can see is broken/can be improved
A lawyer saying that its not his fault the rules are what they are.