Updates to README.md

[freemansw1]

This will resolve #58 and also contains more general updates to our README, including changing URLs and updating our contributing section.

• Have you followed our guidelines in CONTRIBUTING.md?
• Have you self-reviewed your code and corrected any misspellings?
• Have you written documentation that is easy to understand?
• Have you written descriptive commit messages?
• Have you added NumPy docstrings for newly added functions?
• Have you formatted your code using black?
• If you have introduced a new functionality, have you added adequate unit tests?
• Have all tests passed in your local clone?
• If you have introduced a new functionality, have you added an example notebook?
• Have you kept your pull request small and limited so that it is easy to review?
• Have the newest changes from this branch been merged?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Base: 36.22% // Head: 36.22% // No change to project coverage 👍

Coverage data is based on head (200dc1d) compared to base (0744e06).
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           RC_v1.4.0     #197   +/-   ##
==========================================
  Coverage      36.22%   36.22%           
==========================================
  Files             10       10           
  Lines           2120     2120           
==========================================
  Hits             768      768           
  Misses          1352     1352           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	36.22% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[JuliaKukulies]

Great update @freemansw1! I have nothing to comment on except for one typo that has been there before but we may as well fix it with this PR

l. 20 Individual features are indentified -> Individual features are identified

[freemansw1]

Good catch @JuliaKukulies! This has been fixed.

[snilsn]

Nice revision @freemansw1! I have nothing to add.