 Solution

There is a sign error in the printed assertion under the standard sl2 triple convention. Work first with the operators exactly as printed. Since the $v_i$ form a Hamel basis, their prescribed images extend to linear maps on $V$; each vector is a finite linear combination of basis vectors.

For $i\ge 1$, the operator commutators with $h$ areAt $i=0$, the first identity holds because both sides vanish; the second holds because $hf(v_0)=-2v_1$ and $fh(v_0)=0$. On the other hand, for $i\ge 1$,At $i=0$, both $ef(v_0)=e(v_1)=0$ and $fe(v_0)=0$, so this identity also holds. Thus the actual relations areIn particular, $[e,f]v_1=2v_1\ne -2v_1=h{v}_1$ in characteristic zero; the requested equality cannot hold as printed. Settingcorrects the sign and gives $[H,E]=2E$, $[H,F]=-2F$, $[E,F]=H$. These are the standard sl2 triple relations, so the standard basis of the sl2 Lie algebra acts on $V$ by $E,H,F$, giving a Lie algebra representation.

For completeness, these operators are linearly independent: applying $aE+bH+cF=0$ to $v_0$ gives $c=0$; applying it to $v_1$ then gives $b=0$; applying it to $v_2$ gives $a=0$. Hence the printed operators span a Lie subalgebra isomorphic to the sl2 Lie algebra, even though their printed normalization fails. Replacing the coefficient $i-1$ in the printed definition of $e(v_i)$ by $1-i$ is one equivalent way to repair the statement.