When is an Integer a Rational Number, and are All Ratios Rational, Even $\frac{\sqrt{7}}{2}$? 
$$\Bbb{Q} = \left\{\frac ab \mid \text{$a$ and $b$ are integers and $b \ne 0$} \right\}$$
In other words, a rational number is a number that can be written as one integer over another.
For an integer, the denominator is $1$ in that case. For example, $5$ can be written as $\dfrac 51$.

Is $5$ a rational number? Or is $\dfrac 51$  a rational number? I'm not able to figure out what the definition is actually saying. What are the numbers that cannot be written as one integer over another?

Irrational numbers are the numbers that cannot be written as one integer over another. Roots of numbers that are not perfect squares are examples of irrational numbers.

However, what is this then: $\dfrac {\sqrt 7} {2}$?
 A: $\sqrt{7}$ is not a rational number. 
You can prove it by the absurd.
Suppose that you can write it as $\sqrt{7}=\frac{a}{b}$ with $a$ and $b$ natural numbers. 
You can suppose without loss of generality that $a$ and $b$ are coprime.
 Decompose $a$ and $b$ in prime factors: $a=a_1^{n_1}\dots a_k^{n_k}$ and $b=b_1^{m_1}\dots b_l^{m_l}$. All the $a_i$ are primes and different of all the $b_j$ (also primes) because $a$ $b$ are coprime.
$\sqrt{7}=\frac{a}{b}$ give you $7=\frac{a^2}{b^2}$ hence $a^2=7\cdot b^2$ hence $a_1^{2n_1}\dots a_k^{2n_k}=7b_1^{2m_1}\dots b_l^{2m_l}$ hence one of the $a_i$ is $7$ (lets say $a_1=7$). We have: $7^{2n_1-1}\dots a_k^{2n_k}=b_1^{2m_1}\dots b_l^{2m_l}$ hence $7$ divide $b_1^{2m_1}\dots b_l^{2m_l}$ hence one of the $b_j$ is $7$ contradiction with $a$ $b$ coprimes.
A: Although there are many answers here already, unless if I have missed something none of them actually proves that $\sqrt{7}/2$ is irrational.  As already noted in the comments to amWhy's answer, it is not valid to say that if $a$ is not an integer then $a/b$ is irrational.  However, it is valid to say that if $a$ is irrational and $b$ is rational, then $a/b$ is irrational.  (This is because if $a/b$ and $b$ were both rational, then their product $a$ would be rational because the product of rational numbers is always rational.)  Because $\sqrt{7}$ is irrational (as shown in wece's answer) and 2 is rational, the ratio $\sqrt{7}/2$ is irrational.
A: As $5$ can be written as $\frac 51$, yes, $5$ is a rational number. All integers are also rational. The fraction $\frac{\sqrt 7}2$ does not denote a rational number because the numerator $\sqrt 7$ is not an integer.
A: Any number for which it is possible to express as the ratio or quotient of integers is a rational number. So yes, $5$ is rational, because it is possible to express this as $\frac 51, \frac {10}{2}...$. 
$5$ is also an integer. Every integer is a rational number, but not all rational numbers, e.g. $\frac 12$, is an integer. We know $\frac 12$ is rational, because it is the quotient of two integers.
However, $\dfrac {\sqrt 7}{2}$ is not a ratio of integers. It is a ratio of a non-integer, namely $\sqrt 7$, over an integer. So $\dfrac{\sqrt 7}{2}$ is not rational.
A: $5$ is an integer and a rational number. It is convention that we omit the denominator when it is $1$.
$\frac{\sqrt{7}}{2}$ is not a rational number as it does not conform to the definition i.e., the numerator is not an integer.
A: A and B have to be integers. Square root 7 is not an integer. It is irrational so it does not qualify as being a rational number. Yes 5/1 is rational. It perfectly satisfies the definition. 
A: Rational numbers are usually defined in terms of the integers.
I would define a rational number
as an ordered pair of integers
$(a, b)$ such that $b \ne 0$.
I would then define equality for rational numbers
by $(a, b) = (c, d)$ if and only if
$ad = bc$.
With the interpretation of $(a, b)$
as the rational number $a/b$,
this means that $a/b = c/d$
if and only if $ad = bc$.
In other words,
our previous knowledge of how
rational number should behave
drives all our definitions relating to 
these rational numbers.
For example, since we want
$a/b + c/d = (ad+bd)/bd$,
we would $define$ addition by
$(a, b)+(c,d) = (ad+bc, bd)$.
We would then show that
these "rational numbers"
behave exactly like we want rational numbers to behave.
Finally, we would say
"From now on, we will write
$(a, b)$ as $a/b$",
and then forget all the constructions
since we have laboriously constructed
something we we already quite familiar with.
Another example of this is defining all integers
in terms of positive integers.
We can write an integer as
an ordered pair of positive integers
$(a, b)$
with equality being defined by
$(a, b) = (c, d)$ if and only if
$a+d = b+c$.
This is because we want $(a, b)$ to mean $a-b$,
and $a-b = c-d$ is the same as
$a+d = b+c$.
This reason we use this definition of equality
is that, in our definition
of "integers", we can only use positive integers,
where addition is always possible, but subtraction is not always possible.
Similarly, in our definition of
rational numbers in terms of integers,
multiplication is always possible,
but division is not always possible.
For more than you probably want to know
about this process,
read "Foundations of Analysis" by Edmund Landau.
This starts with constructing the integers
and ends up with the complex numbers.
