SA should own their part in this fiasco, retract the article and apologize to their members and the great team at Exro. 

Daniel I really appreciate your prompt response/resolution on this question. The devil is in the details, as they say, and this clarity will hopefully improve the content of Marketplace articles. 

Awesome, so the author can choose not to tag the article with tickers, and it will then remain blank under the header.? If so, I will pass this on to my author. Thanks so much for your help on this matter.

Thanks for the image Daniel. Yes was able to see it. Under the header in the image there are 4 tickers. This is what I am referring to. Are they not the result of one of the two default disclosure wherein tickers are mandatory?

Hi Daniel. The image you pasted did not appear. Are you saying that if an author used either of the two disclaimers that requires the ticker field to be entered, it will not appear at all any more in the sub headers?

Thanks for the reply Daniel. Can you confirm when the change was made? I was led to believe that the current default disclosures for Marketplace posts required you also add the ticker(s) to the default fields for two of the three disclosure choices offered. The third did not require it but was for the "no position" option (and is where a clash can occur as described above). From what I understand the two default disclosures require the ticker and it appears below the header of the post (on the list of posts page) and if you click on the post the ticker appears again below the header for the post. 

Two examples of this: 

http://bit.ly/2tGMTvE

and below:

http://bit.ly/2GojVDq

Perhaps the default disclosures were changed today, so this no longer happens?