Just for the sake of discussion:
Is Europe more represented, or more fragmented?
I already discarded showing it, but as you say, just for sake of discusión...
Regarding overrepresentation of Europe, please take also into account thies:
Albeit small in size, the European subcontinent has the characteristic that most of its land is habitable (cannot be said the same of the Americas, Africa, Asia or Australia), thus leading to that huge red blob in comparison with most other contintents .
With the exception of East China and India, that we have to recognize, could play the role of two Europe of its own, population-wise Europe is "bigger" than any other continent.
Which leads to the second comment and related to your point - the fragmentation of Europe is more "visible" than that of India and China. And while
(and please excuse if some comparison is nonsense, I'm not that of an expert on this) I am not saying the difference between a Spanish and a German is greater than in example than the one from a Cantonese to a Shangaian or from someone from Kerala to someone from Delhi, the fact is that the German and Spanish present themselves to the world as different nations, while the Chinese and Indians present themselves as a single one.
This fragmentation in Europe is also clear in some main, related, but often antagonistic "cultures" (or sub-cultures) - the romano-latin-catholic-mediterranean; the germanic-protestant-centroeuropean (and also the isolationist-british)... and these are the ones that make the root for FI, INTGR and the NSA (not to say the rus-east-europeans/ortodox are way much more far away of these three - and that's the main reason you will have much poles and half of ucranians angered of being merged with Russia).
So, Neither Europe is a continuum of a single "Western civilization", neiter is so small as land size may suggest. It can be still overrepresented, I agree, but not as much as some propose.