The "whoever" would be me, and I do mean words per minute, although the test might not have worked properly. I've literally broken reading tests in primary school. We were once supposed to read and remember as much as we could of a text in five minutes, then put away the text pamphlet and start answering questions on a second sheet of paper.
I finished reading the text and crossed off all the answers before the five minutes had passed, then began reading the text again, and the teacher sort of excused me from having to hand in my results because his chart didn't cover this sort of event. (All the answers correct, incidentally.)
You mentioned that people looked at 10 words a second. I seem to have acquired the ability to parse whole sentences as units, so I don't look at individual words, much the way good readers don't have to think of each letter, but instead recognize words as near-ideograms.
In addition to a possibly malfunctioning test, 2000 WPM is probably under good conditions; I'll go much slower if the font is funny, or the writing is poor, and I will seriously stutter if I encounter a single typo in an otherwise good book.
.
