There's another ooze: "to flow slowly" from Old English wosen. The spelling was influenced by the first ooze but it is unrelated (OED).
*weis- became Latin uīrus "poisonous secretion, venom". This was borrowed into Middle English as virus with the meaning of "semen", and it didn't take on its modern meaning until 1900.
Some think the plural of English virus is viri or virii because that's what it might have been in Latin. But in fact the Latin uīrus doesn't have an attested plural. And it's a neuter noun, so if it did have a plural, it wouldn't have been *uīri. It's possible the Latin word had an incomplete paradigm, or it had a plural that doesn't survive in writing, or that it was a noncount noun with no plural. This last possibility is supported by the fact that its first appearance in English is as a noncount noun.
a1398 J. TREVISA tr. Bartholomaeus Anglicus De Proprietatibus Rerum (BL Add.) f. 60, Among þe gentals [read genitals], on hatte þe pyntyl veretrum in latyn, for it is a man his owne membre oþer for virus come ouȝt þerof.
The only plural given in the OED is viruses.