Perhaps more experienced Wikipedians can correct me, but my understanding is that the vote for deletion isn't actually a vote. At the end of the day, a Wikipedia admin decides based on the arguments presented, not the number of opinions in either direction.
Alternatively, if you wish to remake the page and improve it, there's nothing stopping you from re-creating it with new sources and information added[1]. The "Be Bold" guideline exists to encourage people to do things like that if you think you can improve it.
[1] Not entirely true, controversial pages that get recreated and deleted back and forth can be blocked from being recreated. At least in the case of Nemerle, it appears that that has yet to happen.
One of the challenges with remaking the page is that you have to start over from scratch. If the page is deleted, it's gone. There's no way for you to see the edit history or anything. So you have to go back to basic research. Get to the library. Sit on Google for an afternoon.
Bureaucrats can bring it back. They (and among others, arbitration committee) can access deleted articles, deletion logs etc. as they please. Undelete has its own process.
