But that comment was written in English, not Latin, and such irregular pluralisation is better to be treated as a feature of the modern English. People generall

But that comment was written in English, not Latin, and such irregular pluralisation is better to be treated as a feature of the modern English. People generally do this not because they someway learned Latin incorrectly but because they noticed how other English speakers pluralise Latin looking words, and that is exactly how new grammar rules are adopted. Also by referring to ancient Rome you treat Latin as some sort of a fixed, dead language, but English speakers do that irregular pluralisation to words borrowed from the modern languages descented from Latin too (see cappuccini), and so for example in Romanian plural of virus is virusuri, and in Neo-Latin it's vira. Personally I want to prefer virusuri just because it's the funniest one.