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In my (unpublished) [code changes](https://github.com/brakmic/bitcoin/commit/0b3ee615491edf6f542631bf6ae6f72eac406550) all raw pointers got replaced with **shared_ptr**s but kept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,
}
        }
        blockId = block.hashPrevBlock;
        --*altheight;
    }
    uint256 lastblock;
    target_confirms = std::min(target_confirms, wallet.GetLastBlockHeight() + 1);
    CHECK_NONFATAL(wallet.chain().findAncestorByHeight(wallet.GetLastBlockHash(), wallet.GetLastBlockHeight() + 1 - target_confirms, FoundBlock().hash(lastblock)));
    UniValue ret(UniValue::VOBJ);
    ret.pushKV("transactions", transactions);
    if (include_removed) ret.pushKV("removed", removed);
    ret.pushKV("lastblock", lastblock.GetHex());
    return ret;
},
    };
}
static RPCHelpMan gettransaction()
{
    return RPCHelpMan{"gettransaction",
                "\nGet detailed information about in-wallet transaction <txid>\n",
                {
                    {"txid", RPCArg::Type::STR, RPCArg::Optional::NO, "The transaction id"},
                    {"include_watchonly", RPCArg::Type::BOOL,  "true for watch-only wallets, otherwise false",
                            "Whether to include watch-only addresses in balance calculation and details[]"},
                    {"verbose", RPCArg::Type::BOOL,  "false",
                            "Whether to include a `decoded` field containing the decoded transaction (equivalent to RPC decoderawtransaction)"},
                },
                RPCResult{
                    RPCResult::Type::OBJ, "", "", Cat(Cat<std::vector<RPCResult>>(
                    {