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.
Both versions are 100% grammatically and idiomatically correct. They have nearly identical meanings, but offer slightly different opportunities for usage.
Miguel came to the presentation but he seemed very distracted and he did not listen to anything that the speaker said.
In this sentence, the presentation is over and we know that Miguel never paid attention.
Miguel came to the presentation but he seemed very distracted and he was not listening to anything that the speaker said.
There are two possibilities for this sentence.
- Alone it means exactly the same as the "did not listen" version.
- With some additional description of his behavior, it describes Miguel's ongoing actions during the meeting, but offers the possibility that they were interrupted at some point.
Miguel came to the presentation but he seemed very distracted and he was not listening to anything that the speaker said. However, the speaker was so skillful a lecturer that soon he was as captivated as the rest of the audience.
We would use this second version to tell the story of Miguel at the presentation if that story was more involved than "He didn't listen."
Best Answer
The past progressive tense is used to describe an on-going action that occurred at some time in the past, ie the action occurred over a period of time. The actual length of that time may or may not be specified. The action may or may not have been completed.
The past tense is used to describe an event that occurred at some time in the past. The duration of that event is irrelevant; the event is effectively treated as if it occurred at a moment in time. The event is always regarded as having been completed.
If you are talking about two actions in the past that are in progress simultaneously, then you must use the past progressive tense to describe both actions. In this case your original sentence would need to be used.
If you are talking about an event in the past that occurred simultaneously with an action that was in progress, then you should use the past tense to describe the event while using the past progressive tense to describe the action in progress. For example:
or
If you are talking about two events that occurred simultaneously in the past, then you should use the past tense to describe both events. For example:
or
You should note that I changed 'while' to 'when' in my last two examples. Simultaneous clauses are often linked with the use of 'when' or 'while'. Other links such as 'and' or 'as' are also frequently used. Because 'while' indicates that a period of time has elapsed, it is frequently used at the beginning of a clause that uses the past progressive tense, and is rarely used at the beginning of a clause that uses the simple past tense. On the other hand, 'when' is rarely used at the beginning of a clause that uses the past progressive tense, and is frequently used at the beginning of a clause that uses the simple past tense.