In sentence 1, I would prefer using past continuous (he was holding the hand ...), because using past simple will make it sounds like he held some white girl's hand habitually. (Note: If you change because to after, I think held will be more appropriate. It should also be even more appropriate than past perfect, in my opinion.)
To explain why using past continuous (or past progressive) is preferred, here is the closest entry I can find in Practical English Usage by Michael Swan.
422 past (2): past progressive (I was working etc)
3 past progressive and simple past: 'background' events
We often use the past progressive together with a simple past tense. The past progressive refers to a longer 'background' action or situation; the simple past refers to a shorter action or event that happened in the middle of the longer action, or that interrupted it.
As I was walking down the road, I saw Bill.
The phone rang while I was having dinner.
Mozart died while he was composing the Requiem.
In sentence 2, if you have this sentence alone:
Fans (queued/were queuing) overnight at a Hollywood music shop for the chance to get Lady Gaga's autograph.
I would say that either queued or were queuing can be used, depending on the way you want to narrate the scene. If you were a journalist writing it as a news, I think using queued would be more appropriate. However, if you were an anchor reporting the news, using were queuing would be more appropriate. This is because, according to my observation, TV news anchors usually use progressive tenses to arouse our attention, to make us feel as if we were in the scene of the news they are reporting.
However, when you gave the full passage,
Fans (queued/were queuing) overnight at a Hollywood music shop for the chance to get Lady Gaga's autograph. While they were waiting, Gaga saw their tweets. She immediately ordered 80 takeaway pizzas and sent them to her fans in case they were hungry.
I changed my preference to queued immediately. The reason is because it will provide the background (or the first reference time [ref.], if you prefer) for the whole story. Besides, there is already one use of the past progressive (... they were waiting, ...) as the main event of the whole story, which is sufficient for a news report.
Yes and no.
Past continuous with "for" is okay. However, "b" is not correct.
"B" is not correct because of "when". Did Jane's parents need 5 hours to arrive at home? No, so Jane's studying happened in the 5 hours before they arrived. Since the studying was before a past event, the sentence needs to be "a", not "b".
Use past continuous with a time expression.
Correct:
"I was tossing and turning all night."
"Jane was studying for 5 hours yesterday."
Best Answer
Tip: Be sure to use "past continuous," not "past continues."
Mentioning an exact time period in a sentence does not determine which verb form you should use. It's the meaning you want your sentence to have that makes the difference.
The following site http://www.englishpage.com/verbpage/pastcontinuous.html uses these example...
The first sentence means, I started eating dinner at 6 pm. The second sentence means that I started eating earlier than 6 pm, but at 6 pm I was still in the process of eating.
Take a look at the website I gave above. It is very helpful and easy to understand.
I hope this helps!