I support the former option as grammatically sound. Both the rivers and the stretches of river need to be in Africa to be in the category. But the whole category tree is phrased equally awkwardly:
I agree that the whole tree is badly named, but I came across this particular one that is worse. I'd be happy to see all these be renamed. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:19, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Any category that includes the word "or" is bound to lead to uncertainty and confusion and should thus be deprecated. "Stretches of rivers" are surely subcats of a parent river, so if we have "Rivers of X" we should have them by type as a subcat, "Stretches of rivers of X". Rodhullandemu (talk) 09:26, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what you mean. The problem is for me, that sometimes whole rivers are eg. meandering and sometimes (more often) just stretches of rivers. We could call them perhaps "Rivers or stretches of rivers of Asia by type by country" like User Auntof6 proposes. It would not be precise enough to call a whole river "meander" or "meandering river", if this concerns just a small part of the river. Even if we are talking about glacial rivers, they change eg. their composition downflow and only in their upper course are they typical glacial rivers. So it was about finding a denomination comprising these different stages.Reykholt (talk) 14:42, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]