“both Jesus and the Apostles quoted and treated them as such”
They did not quote them or treat them “as such”, because as the article we are all commenting on shows, they quote the Hebrew scriptures in a different manner from how they quoted the apocrypha.
They also quoted other works that were never considered Scripture by anyone before or since as well, but I don’t hear you or anyone else making the argument that those books should become Scripture just because they are quoted in the NT. Yet, if your argument is valid, you should be consistent and argue or those books to be included as well.
As the article states, not shows. The Assumption of Moses, for example, was never considered to be scripture by anyone except perhaps a few eccentrics, so no quotation of it would could be thought of as a quotation of scripture. The 7 books, on the other hand, were held as canon by the majority of Jews at the time. Christ’s treatment of them as scripture, in line with the majority of Jews at the time, is obviously different than Him quoting what were considered apocryphal even at the time.