Mismatch in Köppen-Geiger climate classifications

One user reported that
>there are some differences in the climate information documented on the BSRN webpage ([https://wiki.pangaea.de/wiki/BSRN](https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.pangaea.de%2Fwiki%2FBSRN&data=05%7C02%7Carajen%40dtu.dk%7C1c5a6fa508244d45ae1408ddb577e47f%7Cf251f123c9ce448e927734bb285911d9%7C0%7C0%7C638866248722200598%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=7t6UjMGk26Rsd60PCZf%2FjKrgzOKK86616yoTlDSVEZU%3D&reserved=0)) with those given in solarstation.org.
> For example, for the stations and PAY LIN, the climate zone is DFb in BSRN, whereas it is Cfb on solarstation.org.

This is somewhat to be expected, as Köppen-Geiger climate zones aren't static in time, and surely vary somewhat depending on what dataset is used. While this isn't a huge deal, it is also not ideal to have users reporting different climate zones.

One solution would be to override the climate information of the BSRN stations with that found on their website. Thoughts on this?

The issue names no files, tests, or entry points. Start by comparing the BSRN webpage with solarstation.org for PAY LIN and determine which Köppen-Geiger source should be authoritative; done means reaching an agreed decision and applying the climate metadata consistently.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.