While working on this PR https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18570 I ran into a bit confusing situation where in one function a **CWallet reference** was expected while two others dealt with **CWallet pointers**. My initial reaction was: `let's harmonize them by making them references`. However, not being part of the PR itself I did't change anything and completed the PR first.

Now, after having analyzed the `rpcwallet.cpp` code I came to the conclusion that:

* converting them all into references is not the solution as they're originally **shared_ptr**s
* but also: there is no (visible) reason why every RPC function should begin like this:

```cpp
std::shared_ptr<CWallet> const pwallet = GetWalletForJSONRPCRequest(request);
const CWallet* const pwallet = wallet.get();
```

This clearly defeats the purpose of shared pointers for no obvious reason. *Maybe I am missing something?*

In my (unpublished) [code changes](https://github.com/brakmic/bitcoin/commit/0b3ee615491edf6f542631bf6ae6f72eac406550) all raw pointers got replaced with **shared_ptr**s but kept their original names (that is, *pwallet*). In the end, they're pointers too, so the most of the original code remained untouched.

However, some of the helper functions couldn't be changed because external code is accessing them and I didn't want to make this task "virulent". So I introduced new ("Ref") variants that expect **shared_ptr** parameters, namely: 

```cpp
void EnsureWalletRefIsUnlocked(const std::shared_ptr<CWallet>);
bool EnsureWalletRefIsAvailable(const std::shared_ptr<CWallet>, bool avoidException);
```

I have tested the code, with python and boost-tests, and could not find any errors. 
But before opening a PR I would like to open a discussion about this. 

Is there any reason to keep on working with raw pointers when every function call actually begins with *shared_ptr*s?

Regards,
{
    return RPCHelpMan{
        "createwallet",
        "\nCreates and loads a new wallet.\n",
        {
            {"wallet_name", RPCArg::Type::STR, RPCArg::Optional::NO, "The name for the new wallet. If this is a path, the wallet will be created at the path location."},
            {"disable_private_keys", RPCArg::Type::BOOL,  "false", "Disable the possibility of private keys (only watchonlys are possible in this mode)."},
            {"blank", RPCArg::Type::BOOL,  "false", "Create a blank wallet. A blank wallet has no keys or HD seed. One can be set using sethdseed."},
            {"passphrase", RPCArg::Type::STR, RPCArg::Optional::OMITTED, "Encrypt the wallet with this passphrase."},
            {"avoid_reuse", RPCArg::Type::BOOL,  "false", "Keep track of coin reuse, and treat dirty and clean coins differently with privacy considerations in mind."},
            {"descriptors", RPCArg::Type::BOOL,  "false", "Create a native descriptor wallet. The wallet will use descriptors internally to handle address creation"},
            {"load_on_startup", RPCArg::Type::BOOL,  "null", "Save wallet name to persistent settings and load on startup. True to add wallet to startup list, false to remove, null to leave unchanged."},
            {"external_signer", RPCArg::Type::BOOL,  "false", "Use an external signer such as a hardware wallet. Requires -signer to be configured. Wallet creation will fail if keys cannot be fetched. Requires disable_private_keys and descriptors set to true."},
        },
        RPCResult{
            RPCResult::Type::OBJ, "", "",
            {
                {RPCResult::Type::STR, "name", "The wallet name if created successfully. If the wallet was created using a full path, the wallet_name will be the full path."},
                {RPCResult::Type::STR, "warning", "Warning message if wallet was not loaded cleanly."},
            }
        },
        RPCExamples{
            HelpExampleCli("createwallet", "\"testwallet\"")
            + HelpExampleRpc("createwallet", "\"testwallet\"")
        },
        [&](const RPCHelpMan& self, const JSONRPCRequest& request) -> UniValue
{