Anyway, thanks to lizbee for giving me the heads-up on this clever little quiz:
Which Potterverse OC Are You?
And to my great amusement, not only did I not get Maud as my result, looking back at the quiz I actually have no idea what answers I'd have to change in order to get her. So much for the people who accused Maud of being my Mary Sue...
...which reminds me of something I would just like to get off my chest. I don't mind there being an unfavorable marysues review of The Potions Master's Apprentice. It doesn't even upset me that mauralabingi, the writer of the review, thinks Maud is a Mary Sue -- that's her opinion, and she's got a right to voice it. And as I wrote in my blog when I first discovered that review, many of the comments made were actually quite clever and amusing.
What I do find irritating is that in order to make Maud sound more obviously Mary-Sueish, the review actually made a number of false claims. For instance, that the word "tousled" puts in a frequent appearance in reference to Maud's hair (which it doesn't -- in fact it doesn't appear at all); or that her eyes are described as "lambent" (which they never are). The reviewer also claims that Maud is "loved by all except homely Slytherin girls and Draco Malfoy", although Maud's isolation and friendlessness at Hogwarts is frequently emphasized in both this story and its sequel. The review goes on to say that "Maud answers more questions in class than Hermione" (when in fact she answers only one, and that only because Snape asks her directly) and "has natural abilities at magic to rival Harry's" (although she gets beaten in every single magical duel, and only her skill at Potions is considered exceptional).
All of which is to say, people, go ahead and rip on the stories if you want to, and find any legitimate flaws you like; in fact, I'd be glad to hear any criticisms you have to offer that might improve my writing in future. But don't make up things just so you can complain about them.
There, now I feel much better.